ABC Story about Federation Peak

[Overlandman]

From ABC

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-25/ ... /104139922

The experience of clinging to an exposed rock face with a 600-metre drop below is one reason Federation Peak, in Tasmania's deep south-west, is "the most technical mountain in Tasmania", bushwalker Lewi Taylor said.

In some sections, it involves skirting around ledges with no supports.

"You just have a much more massive drop below if anything goes wrong," Mr Taylor said.

[north-north-west]

And of course the photo for the story is of Lake Oberon ...

[DaveNoble]

The photo supposedly taken from the Devils Thumb is around the wrong way, and has vertical exaggeration added to make the peak look more dangerous. Where are the ABC fact checkers?

[headwerkn]

Where are the ABC fact checkers?

*laughs hysterically to the point of hyperventilation*

Don't get me wrong, the ABC is much better than the Murdoch press. But when it comes to accuracy in anything bushwalking or wilderness related, getting actual details right is low on their priority list. Gave up trying to deal with them ages ago - just a waste of time.

[eggs]

I think you will find the Devils Thumb is across the drop in that photo.
The 4 peaks are further back behind it.
Probably taken near the rock climbers access from Berchervaise Plateau

[Graham17]

I think the story is pertenant to remind people of fall hazards where bushwalks become more rock climbing and fall heights need to be considered. Some rope skills perhaps.

[vagrom]

Time for a bit of basic protection.

[tastrax]

Time for a bit of basic protection.

Nope! Personal responsibility is all that is required.

[vagrom]

From memory the Direct Route goes up, then traverses right and then there's the final up. I'm guessing the fallers peel off that last bit though it's possible that murky weather sees them lost on the face before falling.

On a fine day I think it's fairly much a doddle and there's the possibility that protection might even increase the risk. It would be great to put a protected route up somewhere else to preserve the famed original but I guess there is no other route.

If anything's done I imagine it will be done to the last up bit, where the photos are taken over heads to Lake Geeves. But the moment the Gov does anything, it takes responsibility so is obliged to over-engineer any solution with legals in mind.

So it's the upper bit that's likely led to " 20 retrievals (6 deaths) in the last 10 years. Hope i've got the numbers in order.

My guess is that they fall on decending that upper bit so that's the deadly section, looking for foot-holds, straying off-route perhaps, getting the shakes. Yellow rungs might help but as you say, Nope..

[lefroy]

If it's wet, don't go to the top. If it's dry, use your head and it will be ok. We don't need to sanitize something as a knee jerk reaction because someone goes up there in winter, alone, and falls.

[phATty]

They say this guy was experienced and had military training but I think with sufficient research it wouldn't have been hard to see that it was a bad idea. Of course, I still feel for the family and wish that he hadn't been taken so soon, nature can be a cruel place.

In respect to the conversation about protection, I think the final ascent should be unprotected. As you say, vagrom, liability is shifted when infrastructure is put in like that and that's just bad news for the government and for the rest of us. I think perhaps there should be more deterrents and advertising targeting this area. It's so popular now it's being choked by people, some are lucky to be alive considering their experience, warding the masses away might save the environment, our hard earned tax $$$ and some lives too.

[weetbix456]

I’m sorry..but there are a lot of assumptions being made here. Who are we to judge what was “outside someone’s experience level”, or what was a “bad decision” at the time, when we don’t know the person or the exact in field conditions at time of the accident? The guy may have been/felt in complete control up until one brief slip or muck up. There could have been a suitable seeming weather window at the time of ascent…imagine actually being a completely competent walker, but one mistake defined your “experience” and overall judgement. I understand the arguments behind the comments made, but we’ll never know the full story. Sadly he’s not around to be able to defend himself or his decisions.

Also, IMO rope skills are not the simple answer people make them out to be. Available anchors are minimal and often questionable in this environment..belays involving any change in lateral direction pose different sets of dangers (think swings/bottoming out/multiplication of forces)..and accidents can still happen on sections that don’t necessarily appear the most obviously dangerous. Tripping with a full pack in the wrong spot can still end in the same result as a long fall, and short sections are unlikely to gain the same attention. There can still be significant stretch in a rope on a standard belay (so can be unhelpful on shorter scrambles), and abseiling requires more gear and bomber/more complex anchors than many have the skills to assess properly.

[Tazz81]

The argument for making the climb assisted is moot anyway. The Government is broke and sadly the SW doesn’t generate the revenue that OLT/3CT does.

[owen]

It shouldn't be about money, especially when experienced hikers are dying.

The via ferrata routes in Europe are fantastic and we should welcome them here. Federation Peak probably wouldn't exist over there without one.

[Last]

Isn't it time the whole thing was developed and monetised? I see a sealed road to the base, with plenty of bus parking. A chairlift to the Bechervaise plateau 5 star lodge, with helipad for the exclusive guests who can't be bothered with the chairlift. Enclosed stairs to the top with an optional (for an additional fee) stairlift. A fully enclosed platform on top with a glass bottomed extension platform over Lake Geeves and a (licensed) cafe selling "I done Federation" t shirts and baseball hats. If this is a success then they could follow with the same for a selection of other peaks. Paying guests could do a guided tour of the (formerly) wilderness peaks of Tasmania. Imagine what could be done with the Western Arthurs.

[north-north-west]

Owen:

History didn't begin when your life did. People were climbing peaks in Europe and even the Himalayas long before the concept of the via ferrata came to be.
Experienced walkers are always going to die, just like novices. You can't idiotproof the bush and you can't badluckproof the bush either. And Federation existed long before anyone climbed it (or Europeans named it), and will long after Homo supposedlysapiens is gone.
The Eastern Arthurs isn't just Federation and Federation isn't the only iffy part of the range; I know plenty of highly experienced walkers who found other sections of the traverse far harder and more dangerous than the Direct Ascent.

[Baeng72]

I know plenty of highly experienced walkers who found other sections of the traverse far harder and more dangerous than the Direct Ascent.

*&%$#! hell. I see the videos of the Direct Ascent and have an involuntary sphincter contraction event.....
And it's not the hardest part....

[Son of a Beach]

I know plenty of highly experienced walkers who found other sections of the traverse far harder and more dangerous than the Direct Ascent.

*&%$#! hell. I see the videos of the Direct Ascent and have an involuntary sphincter contraction event.....
And it's not the hardest part....

No, it's not the technically or physically hardest part. It is the psychologically hardest, however. My opinion, of course.

[Baeng72]

I know plenty of highly experienced walkers who found other sections of the traverse far harder and more dangerous than the Direct Ascent.

*&%$#! hell. I see the videos of the Direct Ascent and have an involuntary sphincter contraction event.....
And it's not the hardest part....

No, it's not the technically or physically hardest part. It is the psychologically hardest, however. My opinion, of course.

I guess things like the horizontal scrub and steep chutes like Chockstone gully as separate form the DA. I can see that.

[vagrom]

Can I just ask of those who know: I think the first ascent by John Bechervaise and school boys from Geelong Grammar was via a way now known as the Climbers Route, not the Direct Ascent. So someone must have discovered the latter route later.

I guess no one bothers with the Climbers Route today? But others do make technical ascents via places like Blade Ridge. Could a Via Ferrata be run up the old Climbers Route taken by Bechervaise and his school group?

Apart from any of this, could the Direct Ascent benefit from some simple markers that offer no climbing assistance but are all-weather clear indicators that one is on the true path? But that might be seen as a slippery slope to more unwelcome interference.

[owen]

north-north-west:

I think that the Europeans have gone a long way towards badluckproofing the bush. Any route over there as dangerous as the Federation Peak direct ascent will probably have a via ferrata on it. This essentially takes bad luck out of the equation, as anybody is welcome to use them, for free (or not use them if they want).

I understand and share the desire to keep Tasmania wild, but are a few chains and rungs really going to destroy that, for the sake of not having a reasonably high chance of not coming home?

[north-north-west]

north-north-west:
I think that the Europeans have gone a long way towards badluckproofing the bush. Any route over there as dangerous as the Federation Peak direct ascent will probably have a via ferrata on it. This essentially takes bad luck out of the equation, as anybody is welcome to use them, for free (or not use them if they want).

Tell that to Michael Mosley.

[owen]

Tell that to Michael Mosley.

I was more referring to the Alps. Greece isn't a very safe place to hike.

Have you ever used a via ferrata? If so, do you not think they reduce the element of bad luck?

[weetbix456]

Being someone who works with Via Ferratta (mind you in a more controlled environment), compliance is not guaranteed - and it still takes a lot of equipment and certain instruction on how to keep things as safe as possible. Staff still learn how to perform rescues if something goes wrong with clients. It’s still not bombproof…and necessitates significant artificial anchoring (bolts, cable, chain) to make workable - dramatically altering the natural environment. Like others have said, parks are not going to install something they cannot monitor/manage that is supposed to be mitigate risk using complex fixed infrastructure that they have installed. Liability aside, I don’t believe this is the solution for our wilderness walks.

Also, VF is not the standard on most peaks in Europe. They are more common sure..but not standard. There are much more serious summits in the alps requiring specialist mountaineering knowledge. There are already existing ways to reduce the risk/likelihood of accident on Fedders..and I don’t feel we need to dumb down the environment at every occasion to feed our human consumptive tendencies. Do a ropes course, learn how to build and assess trad belays, and make the best plan possible - based off your skills, group, equipment and in-field conditions at the time. Nothing is a guarantee, no matter how much we try to control/conform/contort it..

[owen]

You said in a previous post that "IMO rope skills are not the simple answer people make them out to be. Available anchors are minimal and often questionable in this environment..belays involving any change in lateral direction pose different sets of dangers“ but now you are suggesting ropes and belays as methods to reduce the risk? I'm confused.

[ILUVSWTAS]

Interesting discussion.

Speaking from someone who had a family member involved with a fatality on the descent of Fedder I can tell you no one from my family, or the family of the deceased ever would want to see this majestic mountain tied down with steel and chains.
This type of narrow minded thinking is the same as wanting to see a shark hunted down and killed because it ate a diver who entered its terrain.
We know the risks involved when we venture into the domain of greater powers.

Let the wild be wild.

[weetbix456]

Ropes. They can be a way of managing and minimising risk, but they can’t eliminate it completely..and it takes a certain level of competency to make them most effective and to not pose a different set dangers due to complacency or misuse by innocently unaware parties. They take time in field to set up and use in a larger group, so depending on your time, weather and strategy - they can potentially be a hindrance also. Like Chapman states in his books - they can be more dangerous when users don’t know how to use them properly. What I’m getting at is that every “fix” has its own set of pros and cons and that it’s up to the individual to equip themselves with the skills to be able to assess this on the fly during a trip.

It comes across like some are seeking alterations to infrastructure, or methodology that will assure a successful + completely safe summit experience…but I just don’t believe this will ever be the case. People have the ability to make choices. You can always simply not go if the risk is not “worth it” (for whatever reason) at the end of the day. I hope that makes some sense.

[Baeng72]

Maybe Parks Tas. can hire an operator to offer chopper flights to summit, quick insta photo, provide WIFI for '#living my best life!' post. And chopper back to Hobart.
It seems the way a lot of Parks services are going. Privatising/allowing private operators to enclose or profit off public space.

[TentPeg]

Hansons Peak. Marions Lookout. Chains.
Current infrastructure built for safety of users in a national park......

[weetbix456]

True. However, different TWWHA zoning + user catchment. Much greater traffic + likelihood of spill over from nearby access points which makes considering a broader range of users necessary. I believe Federation Peak + surrounding tracks fall within “Wilderness” or “Self-Reliant Recreation” zoning. It’s something to remember too that overwhelmingly most ascent attempts do not result in accidents. I feel installation of any hardware may give future walkers a false sense of security, and/or may encourage some to attempt a summit in conditions that are still unsuitable - when risk can be managed somewhat already by calculated decisions, thorough planning, contingencies, obtaining relevant hard skill-sets and equipment. I guess I feel walkers should take on some level of self responsibility in the activities they choose to undertake.