Trails in the Alps in Germany or Austria can be tricky precisely because they are fairly well marked and signposted. A red route can be a 'walk in the park', nicely trodden path with a steep gradient in places, or include bits that are quite exposed with a danger of falling. As a complete amateur, it is easy to end up on a riskier route than you expected, as it would not even look remotely risky until you are half-way through. And then you encounter some dodgy bit, it can be hard to decide - do you turn back, or do you attempt it? Will it get worse or better after this?

One should be vigilant not to get lulled into a false sense of security and prepare well for any hike. I have been irresponsible in the past at times but now I know better - I wish I did back then too.

Yep, this literally just happened to me here in Switzerland. An "easy" route at around 2300m which was great - a nice wide, cleaned road around snowy areas. And then suddenly a steep descent with 30+ cm of frozen iced snow. Without proper equipment, that would be extremely dangerous and even with equipment is was far outside the comfort zone.

Ice can be particularly tricky. One of the nice things about modern traction gear is that it's easy and light to toss in a pack "just in case." That said, with harder ice and steeper terrain, it's not a replacement for more specialized gear.

I tried to do one hike this winter that wasn't even particularly hard but it was really icy and cold and the steep parts were steep enough. I ended up turning around given that I wasn't wearing my full crampons.

I turned around at Bright Angel in the Grand Canyon this Winter. Despite being real bummed about it, I headed down Hermit's Rest which gets more sun and was no longer icy.

"Oh well, I'll settle today" I thought. Midway down Hermit's Rest I cross a much more experienced hiker -- she had lived in and around the Grand Canyon full-time for a year. She was only coming back to the Rim to move her car due to the incoming on-season (yeah, just a "casual" river to rim and back, lol). She told me she had just been around Bright Angel the day prior and had seen a girl be air-lifted away with a broken leg. Even though she had microspikes and months of winter experience in that park specifically, she bailed.

Suddenly, I didn't feel like I settled anymore... turning back can save lives and limbs. The majority of the time, nature (and the trail) will still be there when you return. It will certainly outlast you, if anything.

For those who don't know, there are signs around the "presidential" peaks in the White Mountains that say:

> The area ahead has the worst weather in America. Many have died of exposure even in the summer. Turn back _now_ if the weather is bad.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ScarySigns/comments/ekx3rw/found_wh...

They are NOT kidding. Things can go from beautiful to ugly very quickly. 5,000 feet might seem like a joke to somebody from out west, but it's not all smooth trails (practically the same as pavement) with plenty of switchbacks like you're used to. When you're on steep nasty almost-technical terrain and its wet and hella windy, safety can suddenly be a long way away.

I know those mountains very well, I'm a strong hiker even by local standards, and I still make sure to exercise plenty of caution every time. Those rocks are not to be trifled with.

Based on the comment about the electronics, GP is likely referring to Kate Matrosova, who perished in positively appalling conditions, even by the very low standards of winter in the Whites.

She died just off the Star Lake Trail, having ascended to the ridge via the Valley Way, which hits the ridge line at Madison Hut (4800', or much lower than the summit of Washington at 6288'). My partner and I have bailed off pretty much exactly her route in the summer when the winds were too high for our experience and fitness levels when we popped up out of the lee side of the ridge line on Adams.

Anybody who wants a really well researched case study should read Ty Gagne's book on her trip and the subsequent rescue attempt.

Incidentally, my partner and I climbed Washington on a guided trip the weekend after she died. The weather was so good the guides had their cameras out to take pictures. The extremes in the Presidentials are no joke, as stated, but can also result in some beautiful days.

Yeah, that's the case and the book I was talking about.

The actual accident, while obviously very tragic, wasn't especially interesting. Basically don't try to do a Presidential Traverse during the worst weather in about 20 years. It was actually a different situation from the more common cascading failures mode of accidents.

She made a grave error by deciding to drive up to NH that weekend and a fatal one by continuing above treeline. Even Rick Wilcox (owns local climbing gear/guide store and has summitted Everest) basically says in the book that she was well enough prepared but shouldn't have been out that day.

That said there were definitely lessons around just because you have a lot of experience, don't assume you understand the local situation when you have little to no experience there.

But the search and rescue account was morbidly fascinating. Also demonstrates that locator beacons won't always save you. (She admittedly didn't use it properly but I doubt it would have made a difference given the weather.)

I think the big takeaways for my partner and I were a little more nuanced. With all respect to Kate Matrosova and acknowledging that we don't have any knowledge of her thoughts that day:

0) Her mileage to the top of Madison was off by about a mile on her written plan. Not a good place to start for an ambitious day.

1) Most of her prior experience was guided where somebody else was responsible for making the decisions. I am fully prepared to believe that she had the physical experience, but would suspect that she lacked the decision-making experience that would have saved her.

2) She died heartbreakingly close to Madison Hut. If she'd turned around 30 to 60 minutes earlier, she might have made it to the relative shelter of the hut with enough energy left to warm up and get back below treeline on the Valley Way, which is quite close to the hut. Speculation, I know, but I can't help but wonder.

We talked a lot about the decision-making because we could both see ourselves having a go in the same circumstances owing to our inexperience (we independently thru-hiked the AT, but we aren't mountaineers). Reading it was a really useful case study for us and helped think through identifying when we're about to cross the line from adventure to peril.

If you didn't know, he's got a second book out, btw. Gonna crack it open next :-)

I know he has another book out which wasn’t available when I bought this one. I’m actually involved with a winter hiking program which is how I found out about this one because I’m usually involved with leading winter trips in New England.

To your point, I agree and think I touch on most of them upthread. Weather is definitely an an important consideration. She hadn't mostly been involved in making tough calls.

And, yeah, she had opportunities to bail after driving up from NY. But clearly she wasn't going to do that prior to seriously going for Adams at which point it was too late given the weather.

BTW, when I said "you" before I didn't mean you @ghaff. I know you know these things; that was for the majority of HN folks whose experience is likely to be with taller but still less dangerous peaks. I apologize for the lack of clarity.

> And even had some big mountain experience

One problem is that that experience lull you into a false sense of security. I'm not talking arrogance or so. Merely that you can do something everyday that's unsafe and get away with it, training you on bad data to think it's safe.

Like avalanches. Certain conditions are met. You go out. Everything is fine. Same the other times. You learn that it's safe. Suddenly an avalanche happen with those exact conditions. It was just arbitrary it didn't happen the other times.

Avalanches are probably one of those things that you can reduce the danger of in various ways but probably can't avoid entirely other than avoiding mountains that can potentially have an avalanche entirely.

For all the mitigation work they do on a regular basis, there are periodic avalanches at ski areas in the Alps and in the US West. Many of these are out of bounds, but not all. [1]

[1] https://www.powder.com/stories/skier-killed-in-avalanche-at-...

Yeah. Like when in a group having to traverse something almost horizontally on skis, we go with a long distance between each other. So that the risk of triggering something is smaller, and if something is triggered as few as possible is involved and others can do the rescue. I also have beacon, back pack with airbag etc. So minimized the risk as much as I can.

But sometimes I think. If I have to do aaall those things to mitigate the risk, is it really safe and worth it? So far, the answer is yes. Maybe it changes if I ever see an accident.

As a native of a very well known mountainous state I can say it's more than that. If you're summitting on a mountain you need to be prepared to bivouac at least one if not two nights and survive adverse weather. Even experienced hikers can find themselves trapped far from the trailhead by either weather or fire. That's not even talking about the usual bears, mountain lions (don't hike alone), or ticks (Lyme Disease is real).

Landslides & avalanches would be the other big worry and not just from them coming down on you from above. It's not unusual for trails some places to cross a couple hundred feet up scree slopes that are right at the angle of repose. A bad slide can start just from standing still too long. I've been in groups that had to run across them and afterward we questioned whether we'd been stupid to even try.