Not all deaths are caused from careless climbers and dangerous terrain.
Sometimes they are a convenient manner of ending a life of depression or for
other reasons too numerous to mention and the discovered bodies may have
intended to not be found.
As a freshman at BYU many years ago, two friends and I decided to climb Squaw
Peak. I naively wanted to go straight up the spectacular cliffs. The others
prevailed upon me to take the safe route that was further to the north. I have been forever grateful for the sensible choice that my friends
helped me make that day. We had a spectacular--and safe--hike.
annewanderingI think it is fairly obvious that the area is dangerous
based on, you know, the cliffs and such. Why should they have to put warning
signs that it is dangerous? If that is the case both the city and mountains will
be full of 'warning' signs. Utah probably has tens of thousands of
cliffs that can kill a person that falls. People need to start taking personal
accountability and responsibility for themselves.
I am not sure why there can't be some common sense safety measures. At the
very least a warning that the area is dangerous for casual hiding if there
isn't one there already.
no commentIf you have ever read any of my previous posts, you would
know I was being sarcastic for those people who are so against base jumping,
going in abandoned mines, and anything else dangerous. I am all for doing
extreme activities, but we can't ban some of them because we think they are
too dangerous (base jumping, spelunking) We must allow everybody to do
activities that they choose, regardless of whether we think they are reckless or
I agree with BrahmabullMore people have died at Squaw Peak than
smoking pot.Pot is banned, Squaw Peak is not.Facts
are facts.Is this really about public safety, or public opinion?
@BrahmabullBan hiking? Are you crazy?Instead we should
put safety railing everywhere hikers roam. We should include non-skid adhesive
treads on all rock surfaces. In areas of high sun exposure, we could build
canopies- or where that is unreasonable, provide spf100 sunscreen dispensers.All hikers could be tested for physical condition and agility, and
trails could be rated and limited to only those who physically qualify.The most important thing is to create a new government agency to protect the
public against the dangers of nature. Of course we would need a Public Safety
Czar in Washington who is allowed to operate outside of the law in order to
protect us.Think of all of the good government jobs that we would
Brahmabull, maybe we should ban sarcasm, too.
I have spent a fair bit of time up in that area, it's very pretty but
despite the proximity to Provo, is very lightly visited and used. Someone could
definitely get lost or injured and never be found for a very long time.
Lets ban hiking. Too many deaths, and way too dangerous.
That place is dangerous. I was hiking up it once and almost got knocked off a
cliff by this huge boulder that came loose. Another dude kept me from falling
off. That boulder caused a huge rock slide that almost took out some
picknickers down below, but they ran up the side of a ravine and got out of the
way. One time we lost our way back down and kept running into cliffs. It got
dark and cold and we were without warm clothes but luckily found a way down