A woman hiking up Angels Landing in Zion National Park apparently tripped and fell about 1,000 feet to her death, according to park officials.
The woman, who was not immediately identified, was thought to be hiking alone when she fell around 2 p.m. Friday, District Ranger Ray O'Neil said this morning.
"She was a third of the way from Scout Lookout to the top," the ranger said. "We're still looking into it at this point. It just sounds like a terrible accident."
Weather apparently wasn't a factor, as it was sunny with temperatures in the 50s and low 60s, he said. There were others in the area who saw her fall, and they were interviewed by rangers.
While there are chains along some sections of the trail that hikers can hold onto as they go up and down, the woman was thought to be in an area where there were no chains, said the ranger.
“It’s roughly in the saddle area. When you go from Scout Lookout you go up just a little bit and then you go down just a little bit before you go on the big ascent to the top," he said. More details were expected later today.
The last hiker to die along the route was a California woman who fell in August.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Hasn't it already been established that the Emerald Pools trail(s) has more deaths than AL overall? Just wondering here because I thought I read that from another discussion. If so why aren't people fighting to shut it down? And a man fell and died on the South Rim of the Grand Canyon the day after this tragic death. Shall we close it as well?
As Zion National Park's website states "Your safety is your responsibility."
Backpacking - Be Prepared (http://www.nps.gov/zion/planyourvisit/backpacking.htm)
I wouldn't dream of climbing Angel's Landing as I would be too scared, but I would also not dream of even thinking about closing the trail to the top. The people who want to go up there should not be denied the opportunity because I am a big fraidy cat. And the comparison of car-deaths to falling-from-height-deaths is kind of like comparing apples and oranges. Six people killed over several years is not a big percentage of the number of people who actually climbed the Landing.
I seem to have read this woman was an experienced hiker but accidents happen. My condolences to her family.
I posted this elsewhere but will repost here which seems a better forum. Many of my observations have been mentioned by others.
I have mixed thoughts on this issue.
I was on the route that day and was descending just below the victim when she fell. I did not see the fall but in retrospect I know I heard the fall and associated rock fall. The person I was with who chose not to do the final push witnessed the fall but did not see the initial slip or precipitating event.
I have a 30 year mountaineering background.
This is not a wilderness route. There is too much traffic and man made modification to call it wilderness. The exposure is extreme. It can be hiked safely. The route has been groomed and protection in place which both improves safety but also encourages use and may give a perception of safety beyond the intended purpose.
|do not know why this person fell. Prior to the fall I was and subsequently remain amazed at how many people were on the route. There was volume delay crowds waiting to pass on narrow one lane areas. There was an impressive level of cooperation and support. There was however the occasional impatient trekker.
There were folks with sandal like shoes, one with bare feet, a baby on chest pack, a toddler on back pack, young children on tethers, young children springing ahead of their adult companions. Many people who from there chatter clearly had never experienced anything similar. Some approached the edge to a level that made me uncomfortable in order to take pictures. They seemed oblivious to worries re loose sand, false edges , crumbling sand stone, inadvertent jostling or other unlikely but possible events.
I am leaning towards the need to reduce traffic on the route and to improve the clarity of the warnings.
It was indeed a black Friday. No easy answer here.
I have no comment regarding the debate over whether or not to close "dangerous" trails, but I cannot let slide the misuse of statistics I often see in these kinds of discussions.
A couple people have already pointed this out, but you cannot use the total number of deaths that occur from a given activity as evidence for how dangerous such activity is. You have to look at the percentage of deaths that occur out of the total number who participate.
So it is true that more people might die from car accidents in Zion than hiking Angels Landing, but that does not mean it's more dangerous, it just means many more people do it. To use an extreme example: 412 people died in car accidents in Iowa in 2008 - this is more people than have ever died climbing Mount Everest. So is driving a car in Iowa more dangerous than climbing Mount Everest?
Let us be honest with ourselves and stop trying to claim an obviously dangerous activity (hiking Angels Landing) is somehow not.
As Matt points out statistics are often misused. I would go further and say that even those that he mentions as more accurate (deaths per 10,000 users - or whatever) aren't very applicable. Just as with vehicle accidents, falls from AL are far from random. Footwear, weather conditions, human congestion on the trail, hiking experience, and general level of responsible behavior are all variables that affect your odds of dying one way or the other - greatly, I would suppose. Sure, Conrad Anker could fall off the AL trail on a sunny day with no other people around, but it's extremely unlikely. Joe Schmo from Orlando in his sandals after a rainstorm - well, he may want to have his affairs in order.
Speaking for myself, I suffer from acrophobia, and will not be seen on Angel's Landing anytime soon. I live vicariously through the pictures the rest of you bring back.
I was there this weekend when the latest hiker fell. It was extremely crowded, almost to the point of a Disneyland ride. I've hiked Angels Landing at least 5 times, but this time, I chose not to finish. My intuition told me that it just wasn't safe. Some in the crowd were wearing flip-flops. I also saw a man with a newborn baby strapped to his back. It wasn't 10 minutes after I decided to head down that the woman fell. I heard she was trying to get out of the way of a passing hiker. The park should really limit the number of people allowed up there, especially on holiday weekends like this one.
Surely they can find a little room for a bike lane! The buses are packed a it is.
We hiked the trail the day before this event. I went to the top; my companion chose to stop at Scout's landing. It is a spectacular trail. It is indeed high, and requires appropriate care. It is also considerably less difficult and dangerous than many - in and out of national Parks, both in the US and in other countries. Whilst I do not have data to support my hypothesis I suspect that the death toll of this trail is significantly less than many trails that are considered relativey easy walks - Vernal Fall in Yosemite comes mind. That someone lost their life is a tragedy. It would be even more so if access to every "dangerous place" in this world were restricted, or every trail became a Disney style carnival ride with big signposts and guard rails the entire distance. Ultimately people must be responsible for their own actions.