Nepal Mountaineering tourism policy

My feeling is a complete redesign of the mountaineering rules would solve the permit extension issues and other fallout from the 2014 Everest deaths, and send a positive message about Nepal and it’s government and management of resources.

A note from the initial author

Having talked with lots of people and seen the widely different perceptions out there, and widely differing goals with a lot of disagreements, I feel one way to solve problems is to understand the fundamentals and always hold true to these. The other option is “don’t fix what isn’t broken” but I am seeing that is creating a lot of tangles and power struggles with lobbying by various interest groups for their best solution.

Jamie McGuinness Project Himalaya June 2014

The brief

If starting with a blank sheet of paper, how would you frame mountaineering rules for Everest from the Nepal side? The fundamentals might be:

• Maximize revenue from a scarce resource
• Ensure the Nepal climbing community is deeply involved
• Ensure the local Khumbu community benefits
• Minimize barriers to (ethical) business and tourism
• Have a framework that makes sense to both climbers and workers
• Environmental considerations (not covered here)
• Preserve the right to climb unsupported
• Maximize safety considerations

Dreaming aside, the reality of the 2014 season on Everest is some leadership and concrete solutions are required from the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation. The choice is stark either:

• change the rules positively, as judged by everyone in the industry but especially tourists and climbers (social media)
• continue the same direction and lose tens of millions of dollars each year for Nepal’s tourism industry

The changing media

One of the biggest ways that the world is changing is from a top down, hierarchical approach to a network model, traditional one way media vs social media, and has profound implications even in this context.

For example with news media and also the mountaineering rules, the top down approach was a media release eg the change from a one person permit for Everest now $11,000 from $25,000, and that did make mostly positive headlines around the world, seen by millions. However for people who knew the situation better, some realized that with a single liaison officer the cost was still significantly higher than a shared permit, and their opinions spread and so this change was seen as a distraction only.

With the deaths on Everest in 2014 this has reached a critical point. In the past it was difficult for a small voice to be heard, now news stories, but much more importantly, personal opinions, spread quickly to most of the relevant people. Not to millions of people, but to the people that matter, the climbers and trekkers interested in Nepal. Instead of merely reading an article they can comment directly, show whether they disagree or agree and even write their own assessments that spread quickly. This process cannot be controlled from above. It is the wisdom of the crowd.

Understand this and tourism can increase; ignore and tourism will suffer immensely. Understanding it means staying in touch and listening, and it means more than simply reading articles; it means reading the comments too.

So now what is more valuable? Millions of dollars spent on tourism promotion – or having happy tourists and climbers who spread the word for free?

In the past it seemed there was a relatively narrow choice for a mountaineering holiday and Nepal was #1. However with the internet, a huge, leveling network, a person can now find out immediately about climbing 6000m peaks in Peru, Argentina, Alaska (USA), Sichuan (China), Tibet (China), as well as Pakistan, Nepal and India... Now Nepal is no longer a default option at all.

Now Nepal must be competitive. This means making rules and regulations that work for the country AND tourists and mountaineers.

Tourism introduction

Nepal is blessed with the Himalaya and blessed with sharing the highest mountain in the world. Sagarmatha/Mt Everest is a resource that should benefit all Nepal and also the local people nearby.

Nepal can be proud to be the mother of trekking, who lead the way with lodge management training. It should also lead the world in adventure tourism but does it?

Compare with New Zealand. NZ is an adventure destination with trekking, bungee jumps, rafting and lots more but takes long flights to get there, in other words it has no physical advantages over Nepal. The land area is approximately the same. Nepal’s population is ~27.5 million (2.7 crore) and NZ is 4.5 million (45 lakh).

First, what is the difference between “developed” countries, and developing countries? The real difference is the idea of constant improvement. Every system that is made better means more efficiency and makes it easier or more convenient for people (eg paying for bus rides with a tap card or phone rather than cash), or enables economic efficiency, eg building a new airport terminal means more people can pass through and the government collects more tax. However in Nepal, with a regular change in leadership and little in the way of “handover” there is little continuity and therefore little progress on development, added with insidious, all-pervasive corruption.

Second, government should be “BY the people, FOR the people” ... As such the government is a service provider, and the Nepali citizen and the tourist is a CLIENT. The government implements its rules, eg immigration laws, and the client has to accept them if they want to come to Nepal. However after that is understood the government’s duty is to provide courteous and efficient systems. Tourists have made a choice to spend their money in Nepal yet they are made to wait in line for 15 minutes to one hour on arrival. It doesn’t get better out of the airport.

With mountaineering rules, implementation must be courteous and efficient, and the minimum hassle, so the minimum barriers to business. More barriers mean less climbing tourism and less tax income to the government. Lowering barriers also increases government efficiency.

Tourism in the economy

Nepal compared with New Zealand (NZ):

• Generates ~7% of foreign exchange (NZ 16%)
• Generates ~4.3% of GDP directly, total ~9.4% indirectly (NZ ~9%)
• Employs over half a million / 5 lakh+ people, so ~3.6% of working age people (NZ 9%)
• Trekking and mountaineering are labour-intensive
• 803,000 tourists in 2012 (NZ 2.6 million so ~3 times)
• Of which 105,000 trekking-climbing tourists
• 1% change in tourism is ~$8m / ~Rs76 crore change of money coming in
• Sightseeing tourists concentrate in Kathmandu and Pokhara
• Trekking and mountaineering tourists spread wealth further
• Economic contribution of Everest ~$11.6m
• Nepal’s tourism ~$1.7 billion a year; NZ ~$10 billion by international visitors

Tourism realities

There have been several negative issues in foreign media that have raised the question “how safe is Nepal as a travel destination?”:

• The Seti flood
• the fire in Thamel
• the fight last year on Everest
• missing tourists
• the EU ban air safety issue
• fraudulent trekking insurance claims

How many ordinary tourists did Nepal lose as a result of the news about the fight between climbing sherpas and climbers on Everest in 2013? With the headlines, many people thought it was a unique situation but now with this year people can see it is not unique and it will affect general tourism numbers even more going forward.

Tourism is growing in most major destinations, if it is not growing in Nepal then there is something wrong, very wrong and the government should work tirelessly to fix.

How many climbers are going to book Everest south side in 2015? Perhaps half the 2014 numbers, or perhaps less if the news stays negative. Let’s see. This will show if the situation was well managed or not.

Everest is the voice of tourism for Nepal, making headlines and a difference to people’s perceptions far above its economic weight.

Improving Tourism

There is only one way to counteract all this negativity, and that is get real positive news out and bring in REAL change.

Now is the time to completely revise the trekking and mountaineering rules, and send out a positive message.

With mountaineering tourism:

• Carefully limit the numbers on Everest
• Give the Everest and Lhotse climbers who lost out this year a real free permit without strings
• Get rid of the ineffective Liaison Officer (LO) system
• Reform outdated radio rules – they are a good safety tool
• Professionalize the rope fixing on Everest
• Add a professional rescue team on Everest-Lhotse
• Move to individual climbing permits
• Professionalize guiding (in process)
• Remove all paperwork for expedition permits under 6500m/6800m

Here is more detail on each of these.

There are plenty of tourism policy documents and there are plenty of ideas. However ACTION is what is needed. Regardless of what promotion is done, removal of those barriers will benefit all, the government, the trekking companies and the workers.

Nepal tourism can be as big as New Zealand tourism – 2.6 million tourists a year - and imagine the benefits.

How to limit the numbers on Everest

First, the background:

• Everest is the highest mountain in the world.
• It is also the most sought after/busiest 7000m+ mountain.
• It is one of the faces of Nepal
• It has a short season

For the season basically it can only be climbed in about 3 weeks of the year, and that is dependent on the jet stream and so it can only be climbed on perhaps 3-8 days of the year, so it is very much a finite resource, so that is what causes the crowds.

Most people agree limiting the numbers on Everest for the main spring season will make it safer for everybody, guest climbers and mountain workers, and will also send a positive message of better management. However to send a positive message to the “clients” the rules must be fair, transparent and seem reasonable.

There are two ways to do this fairly:

• limit by previous climbing experience
• limit by higher price
• they can be combined

Limit by experience

Simply saying you have to have climbed another 8000m mountain before Everest could be fair and is what the authorities are pushing for. However another possibility is like this:

• If you want to climb Everest without support staff on the mountain, or a support staff ratio of less than 1:1 then you must have summited 2x 8000m peaks previously.
• If you want to climb with a ratio of 1:1 climbing sherpa to client then you need to have climbed one other 8000m mountain.
• If you are new to 8000m mountains then you need to have a ratio of 2:1, so a personal climbing sherpa/aspirant guide as well.
• These measures increase safety but do not limit the ambitious or the mountaineers climbing all 14x 8000m peaks.

The argument against having a 2:1 ratio is with increased staff numbers there is an increased risk in the icefall.

Note that there are many mountaineers who are trying to climb multiple 8000m peaks and who don’t want guides yet contribute to the economy. These are also the people who are most active on social media and on tours around their country and on television. If you make rules “against” them you will get bad publicity.

Limit by experience implementation

The Government's responsibility is working out regulations and issue permits, not checking petty claims and counter-claims.

The government must release a website (a public searchable database) with the names of everyone who was given an 8000+m climbing permit (perhaps from the year 2000).

It could be the job of the sport’s governing bodies of climbing to keep summit records and check claims. This is the Nepal Mountaineering Association.

The best implementation is to use the data from the government’s permit issuance website and extend the database to have the CLIMBERS input their summit claim with supporting photos and links to websites about the climb. So they upload photos on the summit and links to blogs and websites that they are mentioned in. A summit claim should be automatically accepted however once “challenged” then an investigation can be made. With a public website then other climbers as well as administrators can verify claims.

To rely on only a summit certificate from the government is foolish, and is needlessly involving government in something that is not rigorously checked either. To rely also on passport numbers is foolish as some people have two passports and passports are only valid for 5 years. Passport numbers should not be made public either.

Legal details

If the government is checking claims then if somebody does not accept the government’s view, they can make a court case, take the government to court. This is a second reason for the government not to be involved in checking claims. The government’s job should be to issue the permit only.

Limit by prerequisite courses

A second way to “limit by experience” is to have course prerequisites such completing a “Technical Mountaineering Course” or TMC. This problem is there is no internationally accepted course standard.

Professionalizing local staff is covered further down.

Limit by price

Raising prices for permits becomes tricky to judge, especially after the 16 people died on Everest in 2014 and the political uncertainties of Nepal. The way to consistently gain the most revenue is an auction, and is also the fairest way in a situation with limited supply. You must bid for a limited number of permits.

The issue is what is a reasonable maximum number? At a guess 180 climbing members? This needs debating strenuously. The deciding logic is how many people on each summit day. ?60 guest climbers and around 60-80 mountain workers each summit day for 3 days?

Auctions are used with car permits in Singapore, with wireless spectrum in most countries (although that is a somewhat flawed method in developing countries) and many other things.

Back to Everest, here is how an auction for a permit to climb could work.

Climbers go to a website and register then bid, ie say how much money they are willing to spend to get an (individual) permit for Everest. This could be $8,500, it could be $12,200. It is their choice. It can only be a rounded number to $25, eg $12,100 and $12,125, not in between (you will see why later).

There are 180 places but there might be 300 people wanting to climb. Only the first 180 people, the 180 people who pay the highest bids get a place. This is maximizing revenue.

This process separates the individual permit holder from the expedition providing support.

The auction process in detail

First, a climber registers their details. This is their full name, nickname/username, email and how many 8000m peaks climbed previously (unverified). These are the only details needed. The PRIVATE details are FULL name and email. The PUBLIC details are NICKNAME, LAST NAME and 8000m peaks climbed.

The handling website could be the government permit website already mentioned. Alternatively this process could be contracted out to a specialist, and this could be the NMA permit and summit website database so that everything is integrated.

Next, each climber puts in a bid that is ranked in order PUBLICALLY:

Bidding can start two years before the season. To bid/change a bid costs $50 (non-refundable, paid by credit card/PayPal). Because there is a cost to change it encourages people to bid carefully. The bidded amount (eg $12,000) is NOT paid yet as the amount will change, and also a bidder may be unsuccessful, in which case they lose the $50 for bidding but not their bid amount. Returning a bid amount of say $5,000 for a failed bid would result in a lot of negative transactions, a lot of transaction expenses.

Then at 12 noon (Nepal Standard time) on 1 August of the year before the first 25% (so 45 permits) are locked, fixed. The highest 25 people on the list then have to transfer the money to the Ministry of Tourism within two weeks. If somebody does not send the money then the 26th person is offered a place at their bid on 1 August.

Bidding continues with 135 places available. On 1 September the next 25% (45 places) are sold in the same way. They have to transfer money or lose their place.

Bidding continues with 90 places available. On 1 October the next 25% (45 places) are locked in.

Bidding continues with 45 places left and on 1 November the last places are locked in. Note that if there are only a few climbers for the season then these people may get a cheaper permit than the first 25% however if the season is busy and there is a lot of competition it may be that the bids exceed the bids accepted in the first 25% (and successive). This is why the system maximizes revenue.

More details

Anyone who doesn’t pay the permit fee loses the right to bid again in the same year (and also the bidding fees). Anyone whose transfer is not correct but less than $100 different must pay the difference in Kathmandu when picking up the permit. This allows for transfer fees mistakes and issues that are hard to control. For example if the bid amount is $12,225 and only $12,182 arrives in the account then the missing $43 is paid when picking up the permit.

Registration cost of $100 (by credit card/PayPal), one time. The theory for this amount is to prevent fake bidders from entering. To change your bid, a similar cost.

This system is extremely cunning. Do you get a permit quickly so that you don’t have to worry about missing out, but you have to have the money ready... or do you wait hoping to get it cheaper or are willing to pay a higher price when you actually have the cash? And will the price go up or down for the last month?

They system must be COMPLETELY transparent, and entirely PUBLIC for it to work.

This gives you an INDIVIDUAL permit which you can then use to book an expedition with a company offering one...

This system is unnecessary for other mountains.

Guide bidding

Should licensed foreign UIAGM/IFMGA guides pay to guide on Everest? Debatably if they have summited Everest previously as a bidding person (as in the previously outlined system), then no. So they have to climb Everest one time – be experienced - before getting a free or low cost permit. Rather than naming peaks “UIAA” to show appreciation of the UIAA, this is a tangible benefit.

Individual permits

The concept of expedition leader is outdated and means a Nepali cannot be expedition leader. This is not fair. Also teams are joining together because of the shared cost of the liaison officer and other rules yet some climbers want to climb as individuals, not as part of a proper team.

An individual climbing permit would:

• Allow that person to sleep at Base Camp (Everest or others)
• Be part of the permit for company staff insurance
• Be credit card size made of plastic, ie like a ski pass
• Need to be worn/shown on demand to police staff at BC and on the way in
• Need to be shown on demand to fully qualified mountain guides/MoCTCA reps
• The individual would sign to agree to all the rules
• The individual permit is NOT provided by a trekking company
• Get rid of the current sliding scale

So at Base camp – only climbing members can stay overnight unless they are registered as medical staff or base camp managers, and have a separate card etc.

Currently Expedition permit holders are given free entry to national parks – revoke this and have everyone on the same system.

Liaison officers

This is an outdated concept from the 70’s and 80’s and they are a barrier to the proper functioning of the expedition permit system and also a drag on government as typically the civil service loses around 50 people for the spring mountaineering season and around 30 for the autumn season. Already many departments are short of staff.

The expedition rules and the liaison officer system are making one set of rules for foreigners, another for locals. Why not have foreigners simply obey the rules of the country?

This is how mountaineering, trekking and tourism in general work in New Zealand, Canada, America, Switzerland, France, Italy and so on.

The liaison officer’s role is to ensure the rules are followed, to petition the village headman for labour and supplies. Everyone from climbers in the system to the LO’s to the secretaries know the system is only there for misuse yet is a large cost barrier to many potential expeditions.

Replace the Liaison Officer system with:

• The normal laws of Nepal
• Normal and/or tourism police at Everest Base Camp
• At other base camps (eg Kanchenjunga) ensure there is radio contact from base camp to the nearest police post

What is needed? Now there are labour issues and things being stolen so what is needed is tourist police and police up there. If the laws of the country are clear then that is all that is needed. If the laws are unclear or there are additional complications then a representative from the Ministry of Tourism should be based there (Ironically if what the government announced in March had actually happened then much of the mess of the aftermath would have been avoided.)

Film permits also need to be looked at.

Changing the Expedition Permit

Repeating, currently the Ministry licenses an expedition using a foreign leader and foreign members and this means a Nepali cannot be expedition leader.

With a new expedition permit then the Nepali company operating the expedition would take the license, the permit, and be directly responsible for:

• Staff numbers in accordance with the climber experience
• Insuring all staff
• Rubbish (a system that also needs change)

All papers could be filed digitally and with a fixed timeframe allowed for review (so the file doesn’t get blocked) or even a system where once all the paperwork is complete approval is automatic, and public.

So if a company is providing services for an individual then after filling in the names of the climbing staff to the correct ratio and showing their valid insurance then that is automatically approved but can be disapproved.

With further development there will be legal issues that come up, with the Ministry held responsible for an accident. Remove this risk.

Radios for safety

Nepal’s radio rules are ridiculous. Walkie talkie radios are a major safety item and yet there are permits and a bureaucratic system that is meant to enrich the importers of them. Radios should be a standard item carried on all camping treks and on all mountaineering expeditions.

In the USA and UK there is a free radio frequency allotted, the FRS frequency and the max power of the radios is limited. On 8000m mountains powerful radios are required, and from experience handheld walkie talkies of 1-5 watt power are the most practical, with base stations of up to 100 watts.

• Allow free use of 5 watt radios at all 6500m/6800m+ base camps
• Allow free use of lower power radios for trekking

For Everest perhaps 25 frequencies should be defined and regular expeditions can use their favorite; new expeditions have to program their own. There must be a general frequency for rope fixers, and two emergency frequencies.

Everest rope fixing

In the past expeditions used to share the rope fixing between them. Then in 200? The SPCC (Sagarmatha Pollution Control Committee) organized the rope fixing of the icefall section as a way of raising money for their organization. Approximately half?? the fees are used for cleaning up the Khumbu (Everest region) and the other half?? is used for the running costs and other programs.

The rest of the mountain above the ice fall used to be fixed by expeditions on the mountain after negotiation at the beginning of the season.

Now the route from Camp 2 to the summit is fixed by a team from the main commercial operators through the EOA – Expedition Operators Association. Every climber pays a fee through their Nepal trek operator at the beginning of the season, and the money is used to buy rope, oxygen for rope fixers etc, and also pay the climbing sherpas for their work. The system seems to work well however still requires labour to be provided by the main expeditions.

I hate messing with a functioning system but the rope fixing team could be changed to professionalize the whole route.

• New rope fixing teams of qualified professionals
• Rope fixing from the bottom to the top of Everest
• Rope fixing teams are also rescue teams
• Rope fixing team must have a manager to discuss/justify all details with expeditions

For Everest-Lhotse, especially, having a rope fixing team that every climber pays for makes sense.

The team/teams must be run by a fully qualified mountain guide, and each of the rope fixers must be qualified too. Using Aspirant guides is the best idea (and then becomes part of the mountain culture; every guide can say “I helped fix Everest”, which is immediate respect). With the chance to summit Everest as part of the rope fixing team, they will also be highly motivated.

The rope fixers should be fixing the whole mountain, bottom to top, however they should not have an absolute monopoly. For example climbers can climb ahead of them and fix their own ropes however they can't interfere with the rope fixing. This means that if the ropes have not been fixed from South Col to the summit, it is still possible to go.

Note the route could be surveyed from a helicopter or from Pumori C1 prior to the season start.

Rescues

Is it fair to ask people who have paid a big royalty to give up their summit bid to help other climbers? This is very debatable but if there was a rescue protocol and a Rescue Team then there would be less problems with this.

• Define who should help first in a rescue situation (assuming the Rescue Team is not there)
• Qualified people should run the rescue
• The Rescue Team takes over when possible
• The person being rescued must pay according to a contract
• Money should go to rescuers AND their employers (eg the trekking company)
• Extend/establish the secure emergency equipment stash

For example if somebody on a commercial team becomes sick on the south summit, the climbing sherpa/s from the same team must help first. If then need extra help then rescue-qualified climbing sherpas help second (and will get paid) and they take the person down to meet the Rescue Team.

If it is an individual without climbing sherpas first his/her team mates must help first, then they can ask rescue-qualified climbing sherpas (who will get paid) and then hand over to the rescue team.

Up skilling

Professionalizing jobs brings enormous benefits both quickly and in the long term and is the route to more rapid development of organizations and industries in general.

Up skilling creates better employment, with better job security and higher income. With increasing skills there is also the chance to move up the chain faster.

It would be possible to implement for Everest and other mountains:

• Only a UIAGM-qualified guide as Everest rope fixing team leaders
• Aspirant guides as first choice for rope fixing
• All mountain staff NMA basic training-qualified
• Insurance for mountain work only available for NMA basic training qualified staff
• raise the qualification standard over time

Treat the 2014 Everest climbers with respect

“A happy customer tells one friend, and unhappy customer tells everybody.”

Every climber on Everest and Lhotse this year and everyone who follows developments closely (ie thousands and thousands of climbers interested in coming to Nepal/Everest) knows that most expeditions quit on Everest because of threats made to climbers, staff and even offices in Kathmandu.

Ignore this logic at your peril.

In trying to manage big media with the visit to Everest BC and the “free permit for five years” and “the mountain isn’t closed”, you might get that message across to millions of people however those are not the people coming to Nepal. Those people mostly don’t matter. Your potential climbing and trekking tourists know the true story and you cannot change that message in the media, only bloggers and expert commentators can change that.

The only way those 334 climbers and thousands of other potential Nepal climbers are going to send a positive message is if MoCTCA does something positive. Something real and something like what they were promised.

• Send a press release/email promising real change and a timeline
• Change the mountaineering rules completely
• Promise every climber from Everest-Lhotse 2014 a free permit for any mountain in Nepal, valid for 5 years with NO RESTRICTIONS

If this is done then the economic value is huge and the mountain workers get work. If nothing is done then who will complain and suffer financial? Climbers AND workers AND the locals up the valley, the helicopter companies and domestic flight operators.

Having one of the first IFMGA guides basically destroy the climbing season on Everest, after having made unusual demands on Manaslu previously is not setting a good record for Nepal-qualified IFMGA guides. Neither does having politically motivated Liaison Officers.

Accountability

Along with changes in responsibility there comes changes in accountability. The guiding principles should be:

• Remove direct government liability
• Use qualified people so as to limit liability

This is an important area that Nepal has yet to address.

Appendices

List of Sherpa Demands

List of 12 (13?) Sherpa demands

• Increment of immediate relief announced for avalanche victims
• Provide Rs 10 lakh each to families of deceased
• Set up a memorial park in the name of the deceased in Kathmandu
• Cover all expenses for treatment of the injured
• Provide Rs 10 lakh to critically hurt who cannot rejoin mountaineering activities
• Set up mountaineering relief fund with 30 per cent of royalty collected from issuing permits to different mountains (est $1M for 2014)
• Double the insurance amount to the mountaineering workers
• Provide additional chopper rescue to mountaineering support staff if insurance fails to cover the cost
• Provide perks and salaries, except summit bonus, through concerned agencies to Sherpas if they want to call off climbing this season
• Manage chopper to bring logistics and equipment from different camps if mountaineers decide to abandon climbing this season
• Don’t take action against SPCC icefall doctors if they refuse to fix ropes and ladders on the route this season
• Let the expedition members call off this season’s climbing if they wish so

Expedition Operators Association demands

To:

The secretary

Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation

Singhadarbar, Kathmandu,

Nepal

Re: 2014 Everest, Lhotse and Nuptse Expedition Extension of Permits

In regards to the accident on 18 April, 2014 which took the lives of 16 Sherpa, and injured 9.  Some teams elected to end their expeditions as a result of the loss of life within their team.  Many other teams that wanted to continue their expeditions were instead forced to cease operations because of verbal threats of violence should they or their Sherpa teams continue to climb. After several days of intense meetings at Base Camp among climbers, Sherpas and representatives from the Ministry of Tourism, no agreement was reached on continuing.  The Ice Fall route was not maintained and many received threats of injury, if we attempted to climb higher than Base Camp.  With no date in sight for continuing expeditions and with escalating threats, many teams have decided to extend the 2014 season and climb at a future time.  

We have included our requests, which are reasonable:

1) Ministry:

Permit Fees:

        -5 Year Extension

        -Transferable from Company to Company

        -Based on an Individual Climbing Member

        -Radio Permits will be extended for 5 years

-Permit Fee from 2014 Expedition is equal to the sum of any fee of the   year issued.

        -Extension of Film Crew Permits

        -Extension of Liaison Officer Costs and Payments

The International Operators need ASSURANCE from the Government of Nepal that the threats of violence and injury will not occur again.  The Local and International Operators were prevented from continuing their expeditions as a result of circumstances that were not caused by the objective hazards of the mountain.

The International operators request an independent committee be formed to investigate recent violence on Manaslu 2013, Camp 2 Everest 2013 and Base Camp Everest 2014.  We require a full report on the findings of each of these incidents.

If the issues are not resolved in a timely manner, Operators will be unable to continue business with the country of Nepal and be forced to look elsewhere with their business ventures.

No International Operator or Team Leader will be required to do the Ministry Debrief so as to extend the permits and continue the 2014 Expedition Season.

2) SPCC:

        -Garbage Deposit-Full Reimbursement

-More Revenue goes toward the Ice Fall Equipment and Ice Fall Doctor training.  The Ice Fall needs better operators and money towards fixing the route properly.

-A request for a committee to help with fixing the Ice Fall

        -Expeditions are allowed to leave Caches at Camp 2

-International Operators require an expense report from SPCC in full and up to date.  International Operators need full transparency and disclosure of costs and expenses for 2014.

-Helicopter flights to Camp 1 and Camp 2 at the beginning and end of the season for the use of transporting equipment.  Flights will be issued for the purpose of minimizing man-hours in the Ice Fall.

3) EOA:

        -Operators to pay 50% fees to cover costs of:

        -Fixed Rope (Henry Todd)

        -SKEDS (International Mountain Guides)

        -Ice Screws (Adventure Consultants)

Per Sherpa Demands:

        -International Operators are in agreement with some (not all) of the demands set forth by the Sherpa.

        -International Operators agree with the following points of interest by the

Sherpa:

        -Points: 1,2,3,4,6,7,10,11,12,13

        -Point 5 should be discussed and amended

-Point 8 and 9 are not applicable and were not held up to.  In fact, complete obstruction of the mountain was created through force and threats.  The force and threats included bodily injury and burning of businesses in Kathmandu.

Essential reading

Alan Arnette’s summary of the season that has been read by thousands of people, basically anyone interested in mountaineering in Nepal:

Everest 2014: Season Summary – A Nepal Tragedy

Russell Brice’s factual account of what when on, also widely read:

Part 1 – Part 2 – Part 3 – Part 4 – Part 5.

It is worth noting that both of these highly respected people know they are hurting their own businesses by writing such a negative (but accurate) summary of the season.