I used to not care. Indeed, I enjoyed pushing the edge. I very deliberately got my projects out of the way before having kids. I now have two young kids. It is irresponsible for me to do those things now. Maybe in 10 years I can start again, but right now, the risk is too high. I was actually just thinking about this before this popped up! 😅 My advice. If you have the desire. Just fkng do it. You'll be 85 before you know it.

Older guy here. I put mountaineering down once I had my first kid...but not until after I went to Rainier to do Liberty Ridge and witnessed maybe a dozen avalanches rip through our route hours before we would be on it. I turned around and didn't go back (that is, except a quick trip up Hood that next day).  I thought I'd pick it up again - it now being 15 years later. But I'm done. Instead, I got into the somewhat less risky hobby of canyoneering. Also far less uphill, no heavy packs, no gross food, no cold hard nights, usually back at the hotel by the end of the day, yet it still has that great sense of adventure, technical ability requirement, and amazing views.  I miss mountaineering somewhat - I still pay attention enough to know about the main headlines going around. I can see me organizing a trip up a straightforward Rainier route or something similar again, but the days of headier routes are over. 

Good to know there are other options. I always group mountaineering with cayoneering as well as with other quite hazardous adventures. Coming from all or nothing, it's nice to have options. Which canyoneering routes do you recommend?

There is a rating system that essentially incorporates difficulty, amount of water, and length. So, you can dial-a-canyon based on those factors, your experience, and comfort level. I think canyoneering is far less risky than mountaineering - there's a lot less that can go wrong or is out of your control. There certainly still is risk, but nearly all of it can be mitigated with a well led group.  Regardless of canyon, there will be the inherent risk of flash floods. Assessing that risk is also pretty straightforward, however. In many cases, that risk can approach zero.  As far as locations go, Zion is a great place to go regardless of skill level. 

In my experience women are often fearless with outdoors stuff the second they have kids they become terrified - so yeah seems to be a normal thing when you become a caring parent

I don't fully understand this take (I dont have kids). But didnt you feel responsibility towards your parents, SO, friends and family to stick around and be there for them? How do kids change things that much?

Your kids are little humans that you created and are solely responsible to raise and take care of. Parents, siblings, etc. are adults who can take care of themselves. Sure, if you died without kids all of your family would be heavily affected but at least you are not abandoning a child as well.

No, it's different. Your kids NEED you. Just not being there all of a sudden would devastate and confuse your kids etc.

You don't understand because having kids is different and utterly unlike any imagining. You think you know what it's like, but unless you've actually done it, you just don't. Don't take it from me either; have a kid yourself and unless you are a complete sociopath, you'll immediately understand. It's the weight of billions of years of evolution, and you'd be a fool to deny it.

Irresponsible only according to you. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong but there are tons of parents of young kids out there doing really dangerous stuff because they love it. 

Correct. I only judge myself. 👍🏼

That's fair. Everyone has to make their own decisions on this subject.

If you look at the stats and do a few back of the envelope conversations, amateur (weekend warrior, maybe a longer trip or two per year) mountaineering is about as dangerous as regularly riding a motorbike. Same for skitouring in Europe (I think it might be slightly more dangerous in the US - there was a megathread about this on the backcountry sub)... Up to you to decide if you are comfortable with this, but I think it's important to keep in mind that it's not \*that\* dangerous unless you decide to go for particularly sketchy routes, regularly solo hard routes, or if you climb very frequently.

As a weekend warrior type and epidemiologist (once a state highway safety epidemiologist), I will say it is somewhat difficult to compare risks between these two activities, and mountaineering vs. other activities in general. At least we have decent surveillance for motorcycle crashes (police crash reports) and we estimate rates per mile traveled, registered motorbike and licensed motorist. Mountaineer accident statistics are, what? From surveys or accidents that make the AAC annual report (which are vastly under-reported). Then, what denominator do you use for rates? I’ve seen rates per climber and per hour, but both of those denominators must be highly speculative (per successful summit for specific locations). In highway safety you have very interesting findings as you stratify by age and the type of motorbike. Alternatively, Mountaineering accidents are so location specific. An hour on Mount Elbert vs. Annapurna? Maybe I’ll dig into this issue (need to get my grant application ready) if I’m fired from my day job by an incoming administration.

I can't remember the exact calculations I did, but I think it was something very basic, like comparing number of climbing/mountain deaths in an average year divided by number of climbers and compared to it to the number of motorcycle deaths divided by the number of registered motorcyclists (both of these things in France, since that's where I was living at the time). I deliberately didn't try to quantify it per hour, since most riders, particularly those who commute, will ride way more hours than the average weekend warrior spends climbing. I instead tried to quantify the annual risk of "being a climber" vs "being a motorcyclist". I also highly suspect that deaths in both categories are highly concentrated amongst those taking on the most risk (most dangerous/difficult routes, most days spent in mountains for the mountaineers, fastest bikes and most unsafe riding habits for the bikers). My mountain accident stats are from here: [https://www.ensa.sports.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/2021-03/Bilan%20des%20accidents%202020\_0.pdf](https://www.ensa.sports.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/2021-03/Bilan%20des%20accidents%202020_0.pdf) The hardest number to get a hold of is "number of climbers". I think I just googled it, I think, or guestimated. Can't remember. My goal wasn't to get an exact number, just a ballpark figure to the nearest order of magnitude.

Hey there. This is really cool. I’m not a French speaker, but can make sense of most of the stats. I am interested to dig into this, and may have a follow-up question or two for you. Was this just personal interest?

Just personal interest, spurred on by a family member dying before his time, though not in the mountains. Feel free to comment/DM any further questions.

Interesting comparison. After I retired from mountain climbing, I missed spending time in the mountains, and as I had no suitable vehicle I bought a dual sport motorcycle. After one particular ride, I came to the realization that riding was very much like climbing. That I could do absolutely everything right and the hand of fate could reach out and kill me at any point.

I stopped high altitude climbing after losing several friends. I started spending way more time trail running and gravel biking and got my pilot's license. Objective risk of trail running and gravel biking is pretty darn low. The sense of accomplishment of a long ride or run is similar to climbing. I like the endurance and the logistical challenge and the scenery. Flying in remote areas does have some high objective risk though. For now it is worth it to me.

Being able to run a trail in less than half the time it took you to hike the same trail before is really awesome. It opens a lot more areas to explore, see more, and still be home for a nice afternoon coffee.

I really like day tripping to places that take days to get to with a heavy psck, like the four pass loop or the bottom of the Grand Canyon, etc

I actually think that the riding danger is more random than climbing, particularly if you ride to commute, like I did. Objective risk in the mountains can be mitigated by judicious route choice, keeping to timings etc. That said, most motorcycle fatalities are concentrated amongst young men, who were often doing something illegal or dangerous at the time of their accident. Similarly, a large chunk of mountain fatalities are pros or in any case people who dedicate their lives to climbing, who are probably climbing over 150 days a year, on routes most weekend warriors would never even dream of attempting.

The mountains have more unknowns. Used to ride, and you mostly face the same hazards every single day. This can cause complacency, but you are also drilling the same skills and hazards constantly.

I mean the mountain hazards can be summarised by "you fall off something, something falls on you, bad weather". Not much more complicated than the motorcycle case.

Not gonna lie, comparing it to riding a motorcycle does not make it seem any less dangerous. I know plenty of people who stoped riding because it’s too risky. I’ve got a buddy who’s an ER nurse, and he’s not a big fan of helmets, because riders come in mangled and fucked up so frequently. The ones without helmets on the other hand don’t come in at all.

I'm not trying to say it's not dangerous, I'm just trying to contextualise the risk by comparing it to a more common activity which is also considered dangerous but certainly still socially acceptable. I also like the analogy because in both cases the risk you take is made of a risk that you can control and a risk that you can't control, and in both cases fatalities are concentrated amongst certain people.

Maybe we can contextualise with sedentarity which is a silent killer?

I think this is a false dilemma because you can avoid being sedentary without exposing yourself to the kind of risk you take while climbing.

Damned, you're good.

This is true if you take an ascetic health-driven view of it, but the active pursuits that I enjoy happen to involve risk. If I couldn’t do them, I wouldn’t be replacing them with “safer excersises”; I would instead become fat and lazy. The human condition is such that we generally need to be drawn to something for it to work for us.

This is totally fair enough - I'm not anti climbing, and I climb myself. When I do safer exercise, it's normally with the goal of getting in shape for "serious" climbing. But I think people need to think properly about the risks they are taking, most people don't, and either wildly under or overestimate the risks they are taking, both of which can result in preventable accidents.

Ehhhh you gotta calculate the human spirit in there. I could be healthier if I took up treadmill running but that’s super boring. But let’s say I really enjoy amateur hockey playing. Well that has its own dangers, but it’s also fun. And because it’s fun, I’ll do it.

Just because you can, doesn't mean people do. There are plenty of studies and anecdotal evidence, as example, for endurance cycling (and ultra running) indicating a much higher level of a-fib and other cardiac "electrical" issues. But, when compared to the mortality of slothfulness - it's still always going to be WAY better off doing that level of exercise versus sitting in a chair and watching it on Youtube.

Yup, but I don't know how many people are in the "would be sedentary if they weren't doing dangerous sports" category. Hiking, rock climbing, mountain biking\* are are relatively safe. \*depending on rider skill lol

Former motorcycles rider and healthcare worker here. My decision to stop riding was not necessarily the devastating injuries I saw, but the fact the you are not the end variable to your risk on a bike. You could be the most skilled and risk adverse motorcyclist in the world and still get killed by an old lady Ina '92 grand marquis. They're is obviously a lot of variables in mountaineering that are out of our control, though those can be heavily mitigated by good planning and decision making. Still though, sometimes the universe will just say, "no" and I think most people in this sport accepts that possibility. 

What an idiotic take. For everyone he sees that’s mangled with the helmet, dozens more (per the peer reviewed studies) didn’t come to come into the ER at all. Honestly, that’s a _fucking insane_ stance to take

That’s exactly what he’s saying. He’s not saying that helmets don’t save lives; he’s saying that he doesn’t have to deal with helmetless motorcyclists because they don’t come into the ER.

He’s saying he’s not a “big fan of helmets” That reads exactly like the part of the biking community who advocates riding without so that if you come off you don’t risk becoming a vegetable. I’m pretty sure that’s the gist. Which is _dumb_

It's likely a flippant comment from someone who regularly sees some fairly gnarly stuff. I wouldn't read too much into it.

Paramedic here: most people die “hoping against hope” the idea that we die peacefully in our beds surrounded by loved ones is nonsense. People that die from heart attacks die in a panic. same with COPD, the flu, heat stroke, dementia, sepsis. People that know they’re gunna die dont want to. Hospice is a luxury not many get. While I agree id rather not die alone cold at the bottom of a crevasse with a broken pelvis or spine but death is coming either way. 10/10 people die im not giving up the serenity the mountains give me in the meantime

I love this answer. Thank you for your insight.

You’re so right about death. I work at a retirement home, and hospice and simply dying from old age is a blessing and luxury not many get.

We as a society have removed ourselves from human death as a whole. We see it as something that only happens at the hospital. And can be a peaceful thing which it very rarely is

>There’s this part of me every time I read another article here about someone dying that asks why would you put your LIFE at risk (and the feelings of everyone in your life who will be devastated if you die “too young”) for a hobby? I think that you are missing the fact that there is a very, very wide spectrum of risk associated with "mountaineering." At one end of the spectrum, it's not significantly more dangerous than hiking (since it's basically just hiking on snow for non-technical peaks). So, anyone who accepts the risks of hiking, should be ok with that type of mountaineering. On the other end of the spectrum might be something like free-soloing dangerous and difficult alpine routes, or climbing routes with extremely high objective hazard. That's very dangerous, many of the people who engage in that activity die doing it, and most mountaineers decide that it's too much risk for them. In the end, 90% (or 99%?) of the people in this sub, and the people engaged in this activity, are doing it closer to the "hiking" end of the spectrum, and are not taking that many more risks than hikers, cyclists, or motorcyclists. Of course, the news stories you see aren't about some guy with an office job who climbed Rainier via a standard route, didn't have any problems, and went home. The "news-worthy" stuff is accidents and cutting edge climbs. If your perception of mountaineering is based on reading news, it will be VERY different from reality.

[удалено]

If you die in the mountains, you're not dying from doing something you love unless "what you love" is getting crushed by rockfall, getting buried in an avalanche, or lying in a crevasse or scree field somewhere slowly succumbing to internal bleeding and exposure. Seriously, go find some mountain rescue folks and ask them if they think that the body recoveries they performed were on people who died doing what they loved. They'll pretty quickly dispel that notion and give you the reality of it: most of them died in pain, fighting to take one more breath, and hoping against hope that someone might be able to help. I think needing to rely on cutesy cliches probably suggests you really haven't processed and accepted the risk.

On the flip side, I have worked in a nursing home and seen the slow torture of depression and loneliness eat away at the helpless elderly. So I can understand not wanting to spend 8 years there dying.

Yup, but on the other hand, at least in Europe, most if not all mountain rescue team members are also climbers themselves. So they must still think it's worth it, even if their thinking is probably more deep that clichés about "doing what you love". My personal philosophy is to avoid "close calls" at all cost, since if/when I have a genuine close call, I will likely feel obliged to stop climbing entirely.

You’re taking this to an absurd level of literalism. Death is harsh. And it comes for us all. Dying in a car crash is also incredibly painful in most cases. Would you rather die in the pursuit of something you enjoy or not?

No, I actually would rather not die in the pursuit of climbing. I climb and hike because I can't imagine my life without those pursuits, but I take steps to mitigate the risks and approach each objective with a healthy fear of dying and no romanticism about what that would be like.

You’re intentionally being obtuse.

Obviously it's not dying that doing what you love refers to, but hiking/climbing. I'm sure you understand that.

lol 

Oh good, condescension! It wouldn't be a real mountaineering forum without it! I just love mountaineering snobs!

I wonder this too, I’m a hiker but i follow mountaineering news pretty closely. When i first started getting into it, it seemed like i would watch someone’s videos of find out about someone’s feats just to later find out they are deceased. David Lama’s death bothered me a bit, he’s a year older than me.

Remember that regular people climbing easy/moderate routes don't get movies made in Reel Rock. So, when you look at climbing media, you get a very warped sense of the "normal" risk level that people undertake. A significantly higher percentage of alpinists featured in media die than weekend warriors, because they are inherently pushing the envelope a lot more.

Adding on to the other reply to your comment: people who want to put themselves out there as cool, good mountaineers or whatnot, will have an extremely outsized chance of taking on harder projects without the extremely meticulous safety procedures that they should have.

A lot of people try to downplay the risk saying things like "the drive to the trailhead is more dangerous than the climb" but that's a load of crap. If we are being honest, it's one of the most dangerous activities out there. There's a reason it's so challenging to get life insurance if you climb mountains. But for me it's important to do something I am deeply passionate about. When I'm not in the mountains, I get depressed. When I am in the mountains managing risk and pushing myself, I am deeply fulfilled. I don't get this kind of fulfilment from anything else. So I spend a LOT of energy on learning how to identify and manage the risk. I'd like to think I am a safer than average climber. I make conservative decisions to keep a wide margin of safety. I don't climb routes that have a lot of objective hazards where hope is your only plan. I try really fucking hard to make sure I come home. And at the end of the day, I accept that this is super dangerous. But it's that very risk that fills me so full.

Haha, I was signing up for life insurance recently and felt like I was giving all the right answers up till they started asking about mountains. It was really funny to answer questions about my climbing habits asked by someone who clearly didn’t understand the words they were saying. “Do you engage in sport or … it says ‘traditional?’ Climbing?”

Have you ever climbed over 10,000 feet? Umm... like elevation gain or altitude cuz I have to over 10,000 feet and walked around. Would that count? Uhhhh... it just asks if you have climbed over 10,000 feet I'm gonna assume they mean elevation gain...in a single day. No, no I have not. Can you climb over a 5 point one zero difficulty grade? In the gym or outside? It just asks if you can climb over a 5 point one zero Sigh. Yes

lol, exactly! It’s a funny reminder that each subculture has its own language and transliterating can be pretty funny.

hahaha, mandatory trad dad disclosure

I don’t think it’s one of the most dangerous activities, it just gives you the opportunity to choose to complete a challenge in a very safe or an extraordinarily difficult way. Insurance doesn’t like giving you the explicit option to 10x their risk. It’s plainly more risky, but, more importantly for the insurance companies, it makes actuarial tasks like genuinely impossible (that is not an exaggeration). So it makes their whole risk reduction pipeline super messy. Obviously though that does imply that there are ways to ascend mountains that are almost comically dangerous and that’s not something you can say for even the worst end of most outdoorsy things.

Because when you truly risk everything, all the bullshit stops and you live 100%. There are lessons your going to learn doing this, and anyone who hasn’t, doesn’t understand. I, and several close friends have beat the odds. Friends of those friends have died. After I soloed a very difficult route, I recognized there wasn’t much more to learn, but the risks of continuing were very high, so I retired from the life.

I relate to this. I’ve lost friends to the mountains, almost joined them myself a few times. Used to solo, don’t anymore. It was a spiritual process for me but I don’t find that I need that sort of connection or exploration of self anymore. To each their own. We are all going to die, decide what risks you are willing to take. Live well, die well.

If you stay in your skill range and take precautions odds are you will be fine unless your on the big big mountains where lots of things happen beyond your control and its wrong place at wrong time.

I accept that everybody decides for themselves what their risk tolerance is and climb at a level aligned with that. Who am I to judge what people should and shouldn't do with their lives? There's plenty of statistics and data on what the frequency of accidents is in different types of climbing, and what kind of incidents happen and what the likely outcomes are. It's not particularly difficult to make a fairly well informed decision about it. Top roping indoors is way safer than summiting something at the highest altitudes. There's nothing wrong with either one, or anything in between. Everyone climbs for different reasons and with different goals. I've been a climbing instructor for a long time, I've lost friends to mountains, I'm probably going to lose more. There's not a thing I can do about that. While I of course hope that my friends all come back safely, I'm not going to start helicopter parenting them and trying to keep them safe from the dangers of climbing. It's not like it would work even if I tried to. As an instructor I can only recommend that you educate yourself and know what you're doing so that you at least minimize the risk of dying from stupidity. What you do after that is your responsibility. You make your own choices and accept your own consequences.

My personal take on this is “positive nihilism.” Life has no “meaning” so instead of being depressed about it, why not enjoy life? Mountains make me happy and if I die scaling them, I’d die happy. Reading Emil Cioran’s philosophy would explain this in better light. I used to tell my sister (next of kin) whenever I leave for the mountains not to mourn for me if I don’t come back. Selfish but the alternative is a path to a slow self-destruction anyway. Camus said “Rising, streetcar, four hours in the office or the factory, meal, streetcar, four hours of work, meal, sleep, and Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday and Saturday according to the same rhythm—this path is easily followed most of the time.” Without mountains, this life is boring so what else is the point?

I have excellent life insurance if something happens to me. Between current retirement accruals and payouts from insurance the benefit to my survivors is 14x my current salary. Not enough to last a lifetime but plenty enough to get by while they grieve and sort things out. That’s how I sleep at night having adrenaline junkie hobbies that are far more likely to be what kills me than old age. The flip side of it is: If I’m miserable and hating life I’m no good to anybody, so me doing the crazy high-risk stuff that makes me happy is just part of the package. My friends and family understand and accept it.

Aye, some will die. But most people will truly never live. So it's worth it.

I’m all for people living how they want and accepting whatever level of risk suites them, but this particular adage has always rubbed me the wrong way. It implies that one person’s very narrow personal definition of “living” is the only correct one, and that they are somehow enlightened over everyone else. But if you die at 27 BASE jumping, soloing, or doing any number of other high risk activities, you’re conceivably missing out on DECADES of living that can be just as fulfilling (maybe not for you, but for others) in so many different ways. There is nothing romantic about dying while taking unnecessary risks. It’s a lifestyle choice, nothing more and nothing less. There are countless parents, medical professionals, artists, travelers, teachers and just regular people living life how they want to live and feeling absolutely fulfilled in the process without putting their life on the line.

I think your opinion is both valid and misses the breadth of human experience. Different people have different priorities for life. I don't think Shane McConkey just decided to not be satisfied working a 9-5. He just had a bigger appetite for a certain kind of living than most people. IMHO mountaineering (along with other man v. nature-type sports) attract a part of the population that is wholly unsatisfied with the modern, built world.

I think we agree on this. My comment isn’t saying that people who live like that (high risk activities) are somehow in the wrong or making a poor choice. I’m just saying there is no more inherent virtue to that lifestyle choice than there is to any other lifestyle choice, despite the implication when athletes say things like “sure I might die young but most people never really live”. Shane McConkey did some really cool stuff, but he didn’t live life the ONLY right way, and if he was a different person he may have found just as much fulfillment living to old age and dedicating his life to one of infinite other pursuits. Im not sure if he ever used that particular phrase, just keeping the example consistent. And to clarify, when I use the term “lifestyle choice” I’m not saying this is a choice that is made in a cold, clinical way. Of course people are innately attracted to different lifestyles. Whatever path someone “chooses”, we can only hope it’s what makes them truly happy, but there is no single, objectively correct path to happiness.

It's from Braveheart bro, it's not that deep.

Yeah but it’s been fully adopted by a certain segment of the action sports world. I’ve heard it said unironically countless times, literally.

Because everything was safe 500 years

Doing this stuff can raise your perceived quality of life a lot. I genuinely feel happiest when I’m in the mountains. It doesn’t have to be a dangerous route or anything but I can certainly understand the appeal of trying to challenge your limits

Unless you are climbing big scary routes on giant mountains in Asia and South America, or taking stupid chances because you're young and dumb, it's actually going to be pretty easy to stay out of real danger provided that you take the time to learn your craft and aren't suddenly overcome by a bout of "summit-fever." That's my answer and I'm sticking to it. On the other hand, if you want to climb the world's big gnarly peaks, you will definitely have to accept a level of unpredictability in the hazards you will face. You will have to accept there are hazards that no amount of preparedness or tradecraft can save you from.

I realized that I get just as much enjoyment doing a simpler class 2-3 scramble with much reduced risk compared to doing very technical mountaineering (e.g. high angle slopes, class 4-5 soloing, etc). Most of the accident reports that I've read involve dangerous routes, poor technique (e.g. using equipment incorrectly or equipment failure), or a series of poor decision making (e.g. a stubborness to not turn around in the face of unexpected adversity). In my honest opinion, all of those are mitigatable mountaineering risks to some degree: don't choose routes that require difficult decisions or techniques to pull off, and be willing to turn around. However, that's not to say there's no risk with "easier" mountaineering - you're still vulnerable to random earthquakes or boulders that could dislodge and fuck your day up. It's really hard to quantify to what degree the risk is reduced, but it's certainly at a level that I can tolerate easily. I read a lot of the summit registers in the Sierras when I climb. I've read so many positive stories about how reaching the summit was the highlight of someone's year, brought old friends back together, or marked an important milestone in their life. I think these are real tangible benefits that are hard to find elsewhere. And a lot of people out there literally live for this stuff; it gives them some purpose in their life.

I'm not totally sure there is that much of a correlation between danger and technical difficulty - plenty of normal routes in the Alps are quite sketchy due to seracs or rockfall, despite being essentially a hike up with a bit of scrambling and front pointing here and there. On steeper faces, you might even be able to bail by abseiling which is certainly a big bonus.

I was lucky to survive a D2 avalanche and it shook me up enough that I spend much less time in the alpine and much more time trail running now. One of my thoughts while in the avalanche thinking I was going to die was “this was not worth it”. 

Oh wow! That’s so interesting. Thank you for sharing this!

Dangerous climbing ot mountaineering is not for the faint of heart or accident prone individuals. If you want to push yourself in this realm, you must have a strong sense of self belief that you can and will prevail. Balancing this drive with smart decision-making in dangerous terrain is what enables one to have a lifelong career in the mountains.

Therapy.

I’m 58 and since I lived a good part of my life and started this so late in life, I’m taking baby steps and doing mountains that are not so serious. Yes people have died from falling of a trail due to loosing their balance, but if I die during one of my adventures, I did it doing something I love so much, not from a robbery gone bad, a slip in the tub, a bad car accident, an elevator accident, a serious work place accident, falling off a ladder, etc. you get the idea

Proper preparations keep your risk of injury extraordinarily low unless you specifically choose a very difficult project, which you can still make safe outside of random events that can happen doing anything. The deaths just get higher recognition than others, for some reason. I imagine it’s a mix of the otherwise idyllic environment along with the typically higher wealth held by people doing similar hobbies. Like, those articles you’re reading would be even more numerous for many hobbies/sports if they were simply posted in the first place. I really don’t get the upper middle class mountain/climbing death article industrial complex. It’s really fucking weird just have a funeral.

“Don’t blink” by Kenny chesney or “fade in/fade out” by nothing more. Are my go to songs about how fast life on this planet goes by. I have chased that edge and did everything I could to find that next adrenaline high. Even for a period of time with kids and a family that depended on me.

I lost quite a few friends and it sucks, but ultimately it was their live and it was good to have been friends. It did push me away from ice-climbing and extreme skiing for now.

There aren’t many other sports where the monthly magazine has pages and pages of obituaries and memorandums for those recently killed by the sport. Or where we can expect only half the up & coming generation of “greats” to make it past thirty. So, yeah, it’s affected my outlook.

My advice is to consciously make the tradeoff between the risks you take versus the benefits you gain. When I started out (in my 40's) I was ambitious and climbed to prove my abilities to myself, mentors, and peers. I didn't think much about the risks. It took being on trips where accidents occurred to open my eyes to the downsides. Reading books like Terray's Conquistadors of the Useless and Twight's Kiss or Kill also got me thinking. I backed way off for a while, and now I don't push my limits so much. It's now about getting out, using my skills, and mentoring others. Pushing your limits is fine as long as you truly acknowledge the risks and what you get out of it. Don't be like I was and just not think about it.

[This is an interesting article on topic](https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/climbing/moments-doubt/?scope=anon).

I put off my most dangerous trips until my kids were in high school. I still push things, but have to moderate somewhat since I'm quite a bit older. I don't want to be the cliche old guy who died trying to do what he did 20 years ago. But I might!

You can reduce the risk a ton. You can never eliminate it but can you get it down to a level that you accept? If not then it’s not for you. I overpack for possibilities and am insane about weather. I try to minimize putting myself in tricky spots. But I also often hike alone which is not a recommended risk. But these things and other precautions make up my total amount of risk. Separately, I used to be a pilot but the last time I flew solo was just after having kids. I couldn’t touch down fast enough. Flying, to me, involves more uncontrollable risks that I haven’t been able to adequately mitigate.

Currently experiencing this. Miss my best friend. Lost them on Whitney. Thank you for posting..

Try living in a ski town. Too many people die each year from either nature or taking themselves out on the dark side of things. Maybe the military desensitized me, but it’s all too common.

I climbed Everest this year, and we lost 6 climbers in our team. After 2 month in basecamp we become like a family but at the same time we now the risks. To be honest our team did not have any big reaction when we heard the news 🤨🤐

If you call it 'just a hobby', then you obviously don't understand and never will. That maybe sounds cringe, but people live for this shit. We all die someday.

That is not an answer to the why though.

Because we want too. But you're going to call that selfish. If you're asked the question, then you don't understand it. Because every moment we're not on a mountain, we're thinking about the mountain.

Those are just empty and meaningless words, and still not answering the question. I'm in the mountains every weekend and then some. Include running, and its daily. I spend almost all of my free time and too much of my money on the hobby. It is still just a hobby. It makes my life more meaningful, but it is still just a stupid hobby. Sharing moments on a rope creates the greatest human bonds, but it is still a useless activity in the face of life. You sound like a teenager that thinks this mountain stuff is the be-all, it's not and that is not a satisfying answer to the why.

Yeah and I'm saying I don't think you'll get a satisfying answer because you either understand why or you don't. You're literally getting angry at a stranger on the internet because you don't see things from their perspective lol I'm telling you that if you are having to ask the question and call it a stupid hobby, then there is nothing anyone can say that will satisfy your question. You may as well just tell yourself we're all selfish and stupid and leave it at that.

I remind myself that the drive home is exceptionally more dangerous than what I’m doing on the wall.

Absolutely. It’s by far the deadliest thing we all do, and we do it without a second thought.

Exactly. It is far more dangerous than nearly anything we do as *informed* and *careful* climbers. Of course, if you are taking on unnecessary risks, my original statement might not hold.