Sunday 13 October 2013

This is the address from Ang Tshering Sherpa at the UIAA's General Assembly this October. I think it deserves to be seen so I'm posting it here until it appears on the UIAA's website.


Mr. Chairman,
Delegate Members of world mountaineering and climbing federation,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

Very Good Morning and Namaste,

On behalf of Nepal delegation and myself, I would like to express my sincere thanks and appreciation for giving me this opportunity to address this prestigious gathering at the UIAA General Assembly here in Pontresina, Switzerland. My address is focused on questions raised during yesterday's international conference on "Mountaineering and Climate Change". During the conference many questions were raised to our attention such as the Everest incident in Spring 2013, commercial and non-commercial mountaineering and adventure tourism,  traffic on Everest, fixing of ladder at the Hillary step, garbage on Everest, impact of Climate Change and Global Warming in high Himalayan regions and the threat of catastrophic glacial lake outburst floods etc. The following are our views:

1. Everest Incident: This was a very unfortunate incident, not only for Nepal but for the entire mountaineering community. As soon as this incident happened, the Government of Nepal formed an investigation committee and both sides in the conflict admitted their mistakes and submitted in writing their errors in the presence of representatives of the Government and other expeditions. We hope that this single incident will not ruin and tarnish the image of the country and century long reputation of all Sherpa's hard work, dedication, deliberation, honesty, courage and sacrifices for the sake of putting so many climbers on the top of Mt. Everest and other Himalayan peaks.

2. Commercial and non-commercial mountaineering and adventure tourism: The mountaineering and adventure tourism in developed countries and under developed countries are completely different situations. In developed countries, mountaineering is perceived as a sport, adventure, leisure activity and a source additional income. Where as in less developed countries, it is a fundamental source of livelihood where many are surviving on a hand to mouth basis. Of course, mountaineering is as much a philosophical exercise as it is a physical. So, I request that when a global organization that is the UIAA makes any decisions; please look at the local circumstances before passing judgment on appropriate climbing styles. It is also important to note that climbing may be actively discouraged in our host countries if the economic needs of the local communities are not fulfilled and yet the seemingly indulgent desires of international climbers are seen to be fulfilled.

3. Fixing of ladder at Hillary step: During our time at the Conference, we heard many rumors and criticisms that the Nepalese authorities were going to fix a ladder at the Hillary Step. Nepal has not made any such decision. I cannot understand why without discussions and consultation with us, especially the Nepalese authorities who were present at the conference, these rumors and criticisms were allowed to be voiced on the stage during the conference. Furthermore, we are very upset that we were not given the opportunity to express our views on that matter at the time of discussions. 

It is true that many suggestions and ideas are received by the Nepalese authorities, which includes the idea to fix a ladder at the Hillary step, just like at the second step on the China Side. Mt. Everest is an international icon and a natural world heritage site, so of course it goes without saying that we are very conscious and concerned about the impacts of our actions. It is our intention to protect our mountains and that does mean that we have listen to new ideas, deliberate on their consequence and make informed and democratic decisions.

4. Traffic on Mt. Everest: In the last few years a lot of criticism has been circulating on the issue of traffic jams on Mt. Everest that there are traffic jams on her slopes. This criticism came to its apex in 2012 when pictures were published showing a long line of climbers snaking up the normal route. Unfortunately, these pictures gave a very misleading impression to the world. From the beginning, it is important to note what the circumstances were that led to such a situation and how it can be avoided in the future. Nepal learnt from the previous years and took corrective action this year, and as a result there wasn't a single report of at traffic jam this year (2013).

To explain in more detail, the pictures from 2012 were taken towards the end of the month of May as the monsoon was soon to arrive. Rope fixing efforts were delayed due to dangerous conditions on the mountain, injuries and a lack of strong coordination and leadership of the rope fixing team. This delay resulted in many weather windows being missed and climbers getting anxious for their success as the monsoon was coming in soon. When finally the rope was fixed to the summit on third week of May, all climbers went at the same time in fear that this may be their last chance for a success. As a result it led to overcrowding of the route. So the problem was not that there are too many climbers on the mountain, but rather that they were all attempting to summit at the same time.

This year, the Nepal Government authorized the Expedition Operators Association to coordinate the rope fixing efforts officially. This led to a strong rope fixing team being assembled, good quality equipment used, double ropes were fixed at bottle necks and the ropes were fixed to the summit in the first week of May. This resulted in climbers going for the summit at different times of the many remaining days of May, bottlenecks were easily passed through and the rope was clearly identifiable due to its uniform color and quality. This all led to a safer and more secure climbing season with no reports of traffic jams. These improvements will continue in the future.

5. Garbage on Mt Everest: It is a common misconception that Mt. Everest is a dirty mountain. In fact, if you speak with many international mountaineers, they will testify that Mt. Everest is amongst the cleanest of the popular peaks. the reputation of Mt. Everest being a dirty mountain started in the 1980s when international publications featured it as a "garbage dump." Since then great efforts have taken place and government policies have been implemented to clean up the mountain with a great deal of success. For example, my son, Dawa Steven's own efforts on the Eco Everest Expedition has collected over 15,000Kgs of previous expedition garbage from the slopes of Mt. Everest under the Asian Trekking's "Cash for Trash" program. Also more than 800kgs of human waste produced by our own expedition teams and 5 dead bodies brought down from the slope of Mt. Everest for dignified burial and funeral.

Unfortunately, it is cleaning expeditions like our own that also give continuation to the myth that Everest is a dirty mountain. When a layperson hears that so much garbage has been collected from Mt. Everest, they also automatically assume that each year an equal amount of garbage is being dumped on the mountain. This is very far from the truth. In our experience most of the garbage is very old as new expeditions take great efforts not to leave behind garbage. Furthermore, the government of Nepal can levy a huge fine an expedition which is found to be leaving behind garbage. Currently, the Government of Nepal is also in the process of creating a fund to finance cleaning and environmental educational programs. It is impossible to say how much old garbage remains buried and hidden under the glacier ice but each year as the ice melts and the glacier moves, any garbage that is uncovered on the surface is quickly collected and disposed. So, it is safe to say that each year, Mt. Everest is becoming cleaner and cleaner.

6. Impact of Global Warming, Climate Change and Glacial Lake Outburst Floods: We had very interesting presentation from Professor Dr. Bruno Messerly about the impact of climate change and global warming and glacial lake outburst floods in the Himalayan region. The impacts of climate changes are highly visible and noticeable in high Himalayan Region. The rise of temperature in high Himalayan region is double the global average temperature rise. Therefore the white snow peaks and glaciers are melting fast and transforming into huge glacial lakes which are a great threat to the people living downstream. 
Our knowledge of mountain geography and ecosystems allows us to be highly influential witnesses to climate change in our time and to extend that influence beyond the mountain community to everyone around us. 
Our mountains are our heritage, glory, identity, prestige and the future of our nation. The mountain region needs conservation and sustainable development for the present and for posterity. And with this very goal, we the mountaineering fraternities should play very vital role by creating awareness for the conservation of this gifts of Mother Nature and carry out various developmental activities at the local level with the participation of local people. 
Saving our Himalayas means saving ourselves, our future generations because the Himalayas are the Water Towers for three billion people in Asia. As per some scientists and environmentalists that by the end of the century, all the white snow peaks and glaciers will melt away and the glacial lakes will drain out. If the Water Tower for world’s almost half population are empty, it will not only create environmental problems but it will create humanitarian crisis and political problem on a scale never seen before.

So let's think sustainably, work together and act now, what we can do today should not wait for tomorrow to save our Himalayas for us and for our future generation.

Thanks for your kind attention.

Ang Tshering Sherpa
Honorary Member of UIAA (World Mountaineering and Climbing Federation)

Sunday 6 October 2013

Ogwen Valley BMC student seminar

P1000364P1000369P1000372P1000380P1000395P1000399
P1000405P1000415 tweakP1000418P1000357P1000333P1000329

Ogwen, a set on Flickr.
Today was the multi-pitch climbing day of the British Mountaineering Council Student Seminar.  Qualified instructors from the Association of Mountaineering Instructors were out in force to assist at the event, mostly as volunteers.  I mentored some candidates in my role as Development Officer for AMI following a day of coaching, and was glad to see that they all gave their students a great day out. Meanwhile my colleague and friend Dave Evans was hard at work on a "Learning to Lead" course at Plas y Brenin and was clearly enjoying his job!

Its hard to beat Ogwen Valley on a clear autumn day like this!

For more information about the Association of Mountaineering Instructors check out the website at http://www.ami.org.uk

Friday 4 October 2013

Lisbon

P1060919.jpgP1060902.jpgP1060867.jpgP1060843.jpgP1060859.jpgel_Carallon_29
el_Carallon_34Limpó-Gu-46.jpgP1070189.jpgP1070198.jpgP1070215.jpgMemorex-1.jpg
P1070237.jpgP1070173.jpgP1070116P1070112P1070098P1070025
P1070019P1070004P1060986P1060984P1060976P1060974
Portugal, a set by SteveMLT on Flickr.
Another visit to Portugal, this time to check out the governance of a training programme endorsed by the federation FCMP. Inter-federation rivalries make the politics a little delicate in Portugal (so what's new?!) but the training team are clearly doing a great job.

Whilst out there I was shown around some of the local attractions: the world-class aquarium and the excellent, though more esoteric Fenda. This delightful crag is a mini-canyon with a side so steep that it remains sheltered during rainfall - which was just as well as it rained almost continuously for the weekend.

This weekend was also a significant milestone for my climbing, because this season has been dogged by minor injuries, starting with a badly sprained ankle and finishing with severe tendonitis in my left hand. I've been losing weight with a less sedentary lifestyle, and gradually built up the fingers without completely stopping climbing and it seems to have worked. On the second day at Fenda I managed 9 clean leads of pitches from 6b+ to 7b and this continued afterwards with 3 clean leads in a row at 7a at our local indoor climbing wall, the Beacon, Caernarfon. It shows that periodisation works, but also surrounding yourself by strong climbers can help build a "can do" mentality. No big deal by modern standards but hopefully a step forward towards my ultimate goal of leading 8a as well as some return matches at Gogarth.

Report and discussion from induction visit to New Zealand in 2012 (recently published in the NZOIA quarterly)

As Chair of the UIAA’s Training Standards Panel, I was invited to attend the annual NZOIA Symposium at the Sir Edmund Hillary Outdoor Pursuits Centre at Tongariro, in October 2012. For those of you who had the misfortune to miss this seminal event, I can only sympathise! 
Seminars
I’m a climber, right? So I don’t like getting wet (unless a Jacuzzi is involved).  So I can’t comment on the other activities (although the participants looked happy, and wet, in the evening!) I attended refresher workshops for Rock 1 and 2 (presented by Dave Brash and Penny Holland) and Alpine 1 (led by Jim Masson).  Both these workshops were excellent. The venues were perfect for the weather conditions, and the Alpine refresher focussed on similar skills that feature in the UK’s Winter Mountain Leader. Over here we would only use the word “Alpine” for glacial mountaineering, but that’s because we lost our glaciers several centuries ago and have to cross the Channel to find any.
The rock workshop raised some interesting issues for me about training and cross-accreditation of UK qualifications. Firstly, I would say that there has been a misconception about the scope of the UK’s Single Pitch Award (SPA), which has resulted in a skills gap that needs to be addressed at accreditation stage, rather than the current situation where it only came to light at revalidation.  In the UK we would regard a crag with an awkward top access/exit to be generally beyond the remit of SPA: (I would anticipate that a strong candidate would be able to cope with a roped approach, but I wouldn’t necessarily expect this).  So further training would make more sense to me than a subsequent deferral at revalidation – refresher courses should be a positive experience (and for the NZ-born candidates it certainly was!) 
Cross-accreditation
This brings me to my second observation, which is that whilst NZOIA has an excellent assessment system with robust quality assurance and very experienced staff,  the training provision is currently under-developed at the “entry” level. This means that in New Zealand the qualifications are experiencing the best and the worst of what we had in the 1970’s in the UK -  excellent standards and reputation but an intimidating prospect for newbies – it reminds me of the 1990’s version of our Mountaineering Instructor Award, where you had to pass the first two days of harsh assessment in order to get onto the training part of the course! Good for reputation but bad for trainees. 
Opportunities
What I am suggesting here is that the potential for delivering high quality training courses in New Zealand remains largely untapped at the entry end of the market and could easily be offered on a franchise basis by NZOIA. Any doubters should look at how Mountain Training UK has reinvented itself over the last couple of years, with association memberships now at over 4000 people, all signed up, mostly voluntarily, to compulsory CPD (Continuing Professional Development). And by the end of 2013 we should have introductory hill skills available for our award holders to deliver.
Parties
The final night celebration at the Symposium alone was worth the long hours cooped in a plane! We Brits know how to party (as I’m sure Dave Brash can confirm after attending the British Mountaineering Council’s trad climbing meet in June 2013!), but this was a memorable gig by anybody’s standards.  Standout memories include the live band, the limbo dancing, the hand traverses across the beam and putting the world to rights at 4.00 am in a Jacuzzi in a hailstorm. Everybody knew that this particular adventure was high risk but we all went for it anyway. 
The UIAA
When it comes to international collaboration between federations and the sharing of good practice, the IFMGA (International Mountain Guides) is the most successful professional body, but it is tiny in comparison with the UIAA, which 74 member associations and five observers (including IFMGA!) in 55 countries – thereby directly representing about 1.3 million people and growing. The UIAA Training Standard is an exclusive service for member associations, using a tried and tested Quality Assurance system (similar to the UIAA Equipment Label) to validate leadership qualifications. Currently demand is so high that we are already working at full capacity, and will need to start recruiting additional assessors next year. In the meantime the UIAA has agreed to develop an online database and significantly upgrade the web presence of the Training Standards, which is currently virtually non-existent – so the escalating demand is currently all through word-of-mouth.  
The future
Naturally I am hopeful that NZOIA will apply for accreditation via its member association the New Zealand Alpine Club. The current assessment-focussed system does fulfil the UIAA’s quality requirements so I am certain that we would accept a request for an accreditation inspection. The biggest question remaining is how the current level of quality will be maintained if training provision is given the big push that it deserves. However, a robust assessment process is an excellent gate-keeper and any shortcomings in training are quickly identified at assessment by picking up any common threads, allowing weak areas to be tackled strategically.  
My visit
Apart from the NZOIA seminar I was also fortunate enough to be invited as a keynote speaker at  the Outdoors New Zealand forum and enjoyed some great days climbing (and surfing, surprisingly!) with various NZOIA luminaries. My thanks are due in particular to Matt Cant for acting as my host, and John Entwisle for accommodating me in Christchurch (the first time I’ve been climbing during an earthquake…) I left New Zealand with many fond memories and some great new friends.
Steve Long.  June, 2013.

Replies (with apologies to "Candidate X" if he reads this!)

1. Matt Cant, NZOIA Chief Executive

Steve’s observations regarding the skills gap between the UK Single Pitch Award and Rock 1 have been incorporated into our online Cross Credit Matrix so future cross-credit applicants are clear about this aspect. 
In the UK, Mountain Training has a required training pathway for candidates for the Summer Mountain Leader (Bush 1 equivalent) that comprises a 60 hour training programme (or apply for an exemption), then a further 40 days of logged mountain experience, then apply for assessment. This is typical of many overseas schemes, and the lack of an established pathway like this is a recognised gap within the NZOIA system that needs to be addressed if we are to achieve UIAA Accreditation. What we do have are ‘pre-assessment’ training courses that are valued by those who attend them, and we strongly encourage more candidates to take advantage of these opportunities. 

2. Dave Brash, Senior trainer

I have a few comments which were sparked by Steve's article:
1) In the second paragraph Steve comments on the fate of an SPA holder (let's call him X) who was cross crediting at a refresher workshop, at Kinloch. He makes the valid point that 'a crag with an awkward access/exit is outside the scope of SPA', and that 'further training is preferable than a subsequent deferral at revalidation'.
Steve of course is right in this - in my admittedly fast reading of an encyclopedic 55 pages of SPA syllabus, incredibly I saw absolutely no mention of instructor cliff top safety. A failing in their award?? Even at the most top-friendly crags such as Stanage, there are beginner TR set ups that should require an awareness of instructor safety to set up. However, it's not written down in their award. So yes, cross crediters should be aware of this, and be able to prepare. On reading the syllabus this is not the only difference between SPA and Rock 1 - top rope rescues are not tested in the SPA, nor abseil ledge rescues, yet we only ask cross creditors to demonstrate climb/set up/clean/abseil off a sport route. There are other minor differences of course. We (NZOIA) need to read their award more closely, and inform cross crediters of the differences that they need to train up on, or align more with other awards.
So, back to the situation of X. Was he unfairly treated? He was actually at the refresher to have his sport climb/setup/clean/abseil off assessed and then be rubber stamped for his Rock 1, but his incompetence was so egregious that we had no option but to ask him to undergo further training, and sit the full Rock 1 award at a later date. His personal safety at the cliff top (after being asked pre refresher to prepare, then a ground level practice with feedback, then finally the cliff top) was only one element; putting this aside X should not be out there and it is disingenuous to suggest that he was deferred due to being sandbagged on cliff top safety. My report was not passed on to the assessor pool, so here is the summary of the reasons for our decision in that report:
X was in the process of converting his British SPA qualification. The main concerns with X’s practice were:·      Demonstrating his teaching topic at ground level, which was ‘personal safety system to access cliff top’, he used a prusik to get to the cliff edge without back up. After feedback, X could not put this into practice at the cliff top. He came up with an alternative which involved abseiling off a rope looped around a tree, with one end of the rope tied to his harness and abseiling off the other end with an incorrectly backed up abseil device. While correcting his prusik length, he was taking his hand off the rope.
·      - Top rope anchor off two bolts: the linking sling was set over a rock spire, which he pointed out as not ideal, but had not corrected. The screwgates connecting the sling to the bolts were both undone.
·      - Modelling an introductory top rope session: X used the bowline as a tie in. He clipped the belayer’s carabiner into the cowstail larksfoot, not the harness belay loop. Despite pointed prompting (‘Anything else before the climber leaves the ground?’) he performed no double checks, and this was not picked up before the climber left the ground.
·      - Lead sport route to clean anchor and abseil off: Communication at the top was unsatisfactory (didn’t acknowledge belayer’s ‘Off belay’ call, no eye contact with belayer). X’s safety at the bolt anchor was a double sling looped through the rings, inverted triangle fashion. Apart from inefficiencies, setting up for the abseil off gave considerable abrasion potential to this sling.
 Requirements: Both instructors (by the way, great to have two present in this situation) agreed that there were too many deficiencies in X’s practice to recommend conversion to Rock 1. Recommendations: to gain extensive experience in observing and instructing under supervision with feedback, and undergoing a training course, before sitting the Rock 1 assessment.2) Compulsory training: this question was brought up at the symposium last year. Worth considering?

3) (Not in Steve's article) Steve had an interesting suggestion for the first activity in the refresher: Ask the participants to select and climb a route of the grade and style (lead or top rope) of their choice. Quite a lot should arise from this. I have a refresher coming up soon; may just try this.

3. Steve Long, me


I'm glad to deduce that the NZOIA magazine has been published! I would like to take this opportunity to thank you all again for the hospitality that was extended to me last year. I am proud and excited to be associated with the UIAA's Training Standards Panel and I'm sure that exchanges such as the visit last year can be mutually beneficial for mountaineers all around the world.
You may be interested to learn that the UK's Single Pitch Award does not currently meet the UIAA's requirements for a Training Standard. This is partly because of the lead climbing grade required ("Severe", which is only UIAA IV) but also because it was originally conceived as a "Supervising" award and has a very strict crag definition for its remit - walking access to the top and bottom of the crag. But perhaps the most significant difference is the lack of ongoing CPD requirements.
In the UK the qualification is given "for life" and assumes that the holder will take a mature and enlightened approach to maintaining their currency and competency. The employer/deployer is expected to check the logbook and make an assessment about any further training/assessment that is required. Some (including myself!) would argue that this demands too much judgement from the employer, who may not be qualified to make these distinctions. This is an inherent weakness of the UK scheme and the reason why we introduced the Mountain Training Association -  membership of which is optional but requires evidence of Continuing Personal Development - combining both further experience and attendence at recognised workshops . This now has over 3000 members and is steadily growing, showing that the award holders recognise the benefits of some form of revalidation - even if the Boards are unwilling to make this compulsory.
Not surprisingly, most of "Candidate X"s deficiencies highlight specific gaps between the UK's Single Pitch Award and the NZ Rock 1scheme - an almost perfect test case! These were probably compounded by the fact that he was probably at the minimum level required to pass the SPA in the first place and hadnot subsequently gained further experience. By contrast I would expect every member of the UK's Association of Mountaineering Instructors to pass the revalidation comfortably, because all these aspects of access and egress and personal safety using a cowtail are covered in the Mountaineering Instructor Award scheme, and members also have to attend ongoing CPD in "core" syllabus areas. AMI members are accredited by the UIAA as meeting the requirements for a rock instructor qualification (Multi-pitch 'trad" in this particular case).
Take home messages for me? 

1. The UIAA Training Standards are a better yardstick for cross-creditation, because if the remit of the award matches, you can be confident that the same minimum standards have been met. Hence I am confident that the single pitch qualifications administered (for example) by AMGA, Zirve, FEACH, FCA (all UIAA accredited) would meet or exceed the requirements of the NZOIA Rock 1.
2. It is possible to pass the SPA without ever having climbed a sport route, and until fairly recently this was also the case with the MIA. This suggests to me that the anti-bolt lobby in the UK dismissed the transferable skills that are gained from experiencing a wide variety of climbing styles and we now have some catching up to do in the UK - it may also explain why registrations for the SPA have declined, while the growth of the Climbing Wall Award has been exponential. 
3. In recognition of the above we have started to cross-credit UIAA-accredited qualifications in the UK for direct entry to the "higher" awards. This means that UIAA-accredited walking qualifications can now gain direct entry to MIA and IML with the appropriate UK experience. Knowing how conservative the UK establishment is, this is a significant advance for the UIAA standards.
4. There is fantastic potential in New Zealand for NZOIA-branded training courses. They are more fun to work on than assessments!
5. I would dearly love to have somebody from NZ on our Training Standards Panel, either as a full or a corresponding member. However, you need to be "in it to win it"!

Finally, it was great to meet you again, Dave, at the BMC's International Climbing Meet this year! If any of you are thinking of coming over to the UK in 2014 it would be worth considering coming along to the winter meet in Scotland's Cairngorms.