Everest Problems - Implications for Trekking

Yes, I guess it is very controversial, also inside Nepal. Lodge/hotels owners must not be very happy, for instance. Also many Nepalis from poorer ethnic groups already regarded Sherpas as privileged people who monopolize most of the tourism revenue in Nepal, so I don't think they would support Sherpas getting an even greater share. And, in my (and others') opinon, the results of the elections in 2013 (the heavy defeat of the Maoists) was mostly a rejection of the strikes, bandhs, threads and intimidations.

The excellent lodge network in Khumbu has been mostly built with money from Everest expeditions. If the climbing stops or diminishes, there will be less customers during the spring season, which actually is an advantage to trekkers. During the peak season in October there are no climbers and lodges are packed as it is, so the number of beds in Khumbu is dictated by the number of trekkers, not climbers, who just bring nice extra income in April and May. So I do not see why lodges would closing even if climbing is scaling down. Construction of new lodges is affected, and general decline of income in Khumbu would start to show, maybe mostly in attitudes. Difficult to say what will happen, this is after all a Sherpa versus government and Sherpa versus maoist-Sherpa (and maoist troublemakers not working in tourism industry) problem, not something aimed at us.

If high altitude Sherpas start to get less work, I do not see how that would drive guiding prices up in a basically market economy. Should be the other way around. For Sherpas getting $2000/month from climbing doing trekker guiding at $600/month would be a bitter pill to swallow.

Sherpas are on the average the wealthiest ethnic group in Nepal and there is already animosity and envy against them in the Gurung/Brahmin government, so no sympathy is to be expected from there.

I also very much doubt that this will affect trekking or the numbers of trekkers, as opposed to mountaineers. Trekkers must be by far the greatest source of income to the Khumbu region generally - there are something like 20,000 trekkers going each year to the Khumbu region, compared with about 500-600 Everest summiteers and their colleagues. Also I suspect that the mountaineering income is more concentrated, both geographically and within certain groups (say to Sherpa expedition leaders, and the Nepali government). So I think that unless this somehows mutates into something that affects trekking, and such mutation would be against the interests of an awful lot of people, then trekking should be unaffected.

Another thought: yet again almost everything I have read about the developments subsequent to this year's tragedy have been written by westerners - the voice of Nepalis, whether Sherpas or others, is almost completely absent. The same thing happened last year following the violent altercation between rope fixing Sherpas and some climbers - the Nepalis' side of the story was almost unheard, but there was saturation commentary from westerners, most of whom were, as in this case, essentially self concerned, or at best saw things only from their perspective. For me a particularly poor example of this from the latest tragedy are the comments from the 18 year old who now cannot climb Everest this year - talk about having a grotesquely self centred, whingeing perspective. I hope when he re-reads his (reported) words in a few years time, he will feel differently.

There is understandably much criticism of the very hard line being taken by certain groups in Nepal in response to the tragedy, including clear threats of violence. I suspect that this response is due in large part to the fact that the Nepali authorities are basically totally unresponsive to any requests or demands from "ordinary" Nepalis - those in power, whether in the Government or the higher echelons of the civil service, only really seem to be motivated by matters which directly affect them and their families and cronies etc. Matters that don't affect them only seem to get lip service paid to them. Without exception, all the Nepalis I have spoken to about the government, police, authorities etc have a very low opinion of them - they regard them as purely self seeking, with little or no sense of any real obligation to Nepali society more generally. This lack of response will only generate a much harder response from the aggrieved - not just in Nepal, but in any society.

Also much change, sadly, is brought about by force, or credible threat of force even in more democratic societies - votes for women in the UK, civil rights in the USA, to mention just two examples. The form that the "force" takes will vary from protests up to armed force, in the worst case. I do not know, but I strongly suspect, that the groups around the Sherpas believed that unless they took a very hard line, they would either be ignored or fobbed off by the authorities.

Reports of very serious threats to individuals are credible to me - my guide has a brother who has been in the Nepali army for many years - during the Maoist insurgency (which ran from 1996 - 2006, and in which about 13,000 people were killed), his family and home in his village were threatened more than once by locals connected with the Maoists. From what my guide said, some years after the events, it did sound very serious, though they managed to avoid any trouble.

Thank you for your interesting and thoughtful comments.

After years of dealing with them, I entirely agree about the Nepalese government. A more corrupt and useless lot would be hard to find. Of course that is exactly what started and continued to fuel the previous Maoist problems. With the Maoists out of power, they may again resort to violence in their natural arena, the mountains. That cannot be good for either trekkers or climbers. Some western agencies withdrew from Nepal entirely or partly during the worst of the previous troubles.

I also agree that the views of the Khumbu locals have not been well represented and that some of the climbers' comments have been self-centred in the extreme. My friends and I have Sherpa friends/employees who we have known for years. They have worked for us regularly and we know their families and other important members of their community such as Lama Geshi of Upper Pangboche. I cannot say that I know what the communities think but I do know what we were told by those people last November.

They were worried that Everest and other climbing work will dry up because of increased Maoist activity playing on the (real and not new) issues of pay, insurance, and risk. In many cases the wives operate lodges whilst the men are on the mountain. They are concerned that there will not be sufficient revenue in trekkers to provide a workable profit that would come anywhere near replacing the lost climbing earnings. Some fear that they might have to close their lodges or reduce their facilities/quality to lower costs and thus risk loosing business.

There has also been some talk about introducing a trekking permit fee to replace some of the lost peak permit revenue.

As to the economics of this, well the estimates I have seen of the annual contribution by Everest climbers only are usually around U$20M a year, of which about U$4M are peak fees paid direct to the government. This works out as a contribution for 500 climbers of U$32K each in non-peak business to such areas as agencies, lodges, guides, and food and drink supplies. If we say that each Khumbu trekker contributes an average of U$1500 for each visit to Nepal in in-country expenditure, then 20K trekkers a year would contribute U$30M. In rough terms the Khumbu trekkers non-Government revenue is U$30M and the Everest (including Lhotse) climbers is U$16M. Of course you have to add the contribution of climbers on Ama Dablam, some of that from Baruntse (who are only in the Khumbu for a limited time), and other peaks in the area such as Nirekha and Kyazo Ri. The numbers would be smaller than Everest, say a rough 150 a year total, but their contribution might be around U$10K each for a total of U$1.5M a year. That gives us about U$17.5M a year (37%) for climbers and U$30M a year (63%) for trekkers.

Obviously we could argue a bit (or a lot!) about the absolute figures but the thing that seems clear to me is that climbers represent about a third of the revenues for the Khumbu and its dependencies. If that were to be withdrawn because of Sherpa unpredictability and possible violence then there would clearly be a major hole ripped in the Khumbu economy.

How that might affect trekking is unclear but what is obvious to me is that if one third of your revenue disappears, then consequences of some kind must follow.

Interesting article about alternatives to carrying all the climbing kit etc through the Khumbu icefall and the inertia of the remote Ktm bureaucracy to change: http://thehimalayantimes.com/fullNews.php?headline=Guides+hope+Everest+deaths+will+impel+safety+fixes&NewsID=413685

Thanks rdcomments. This has been an issue for some time. I have met Guy Cotter several times in NZ at the AC base in Wanaka and I know that he has been thinking this way for years. The danger in the ice fall is hardly new.

Helicopters have only relatively recently become a practical option with the arrival of machines that can operate safely with a meaningful load at Western Cwm altitudes. Their introduction has always been opposed by the Sherpas generally and the Ice Fall Doctors in particular. The issues of course have been partly environmental but mainly loss of earnings. Until the recent tragedy the danger has tended to take a back seat.

Starting to use helicopters to carry loads to Western Cwm would be the next step in taking recreational Everest climbing further away from "real climbing". Even now clients have hardly any part in supplying camps or fixing routes on the normal route from Nepal (more or less the same thing on the standard route from Tibet). So what is the real difference if the loads get there by helicopters or by porters? Money goest to different hands, that is all.

From there the next step would be flying the clients to camp 1 at least, avoiding the danger of the icefall. Already now almost all climbers fly to Lukla at least instead of walking from the road head, so?

I think a lot of climbers fly straight out from EBC - I have only been in the Everest region once during the climbing season, in 2008, when a chest infection meant I could not cross Cho La to get to the Khumbu valley, but from the lower Gokyo valley and Namche I could hear numerous helicopters - it sounded like the fall of Saigon. A very interesting guy from Peak Freaks, who was staying at the Zamling lodge in N, and who had summited, said a lot of the western summiteers flew out.

rdcomments: yes, many people fly out from EBC. After weeks on an expedition you often just want to escape and get home. I have never been able to afford to on my, more modest, trips. IMO Peak Freaks, I also know Tim Rippel, are among the better expedition companies.

petrus: it is hard to imagine taking Everest further away than it already is from "real climbing". My friends and I always climb alpine style without fixed ropes. Unfortunately most of the Everest "climbers" only have the knowledge and experience to follow fixed ropes. They do usually carry at least some of their own gear. Not all goes by Sherpa just most of it. Flying members and gear to Camp 1 has much to commend it in view of the degeneration of the ice fall. The experience is sufficiently corrupted now and IMO using helicopters would make little difference.