ODC vs. Sierra Club

[HikeUp]

I understand what you're saying as far as providing a means for getting people together and getting people off their duffs. But I don't see much difference between this free forum and clubs such as ODC and OCHBC, except the money. Either way you go, you have no idea what kind of group you will end up with and you have no idea how organized/prepared the "leader" is. But with time, either way you go, you establish relationships with others and you will be more sure of what you're getting into each weekend.

I guess the fact that the ODC and OCHBC advertise themselves as hiking clubs (or whatever they choose to call themselves) attracts a higher volume of people when compared to a forum like this due in part to the more focused purpose (i.e. this forum is for more than just planning hikes).

Does the Sierra Club charge annual dues or something similar? Do the dues cover just club expenses or do you get 'something additional' in return?

To be clearer on my position, I see the point, but I don't see the difference. I guess all I'm saying is ODC, Sierra Club, etc. are not for me.

[simonov]

I understand what you're saying as far as providing a means for getting people together and getting people off their duffs. But I don't see much difference between this free forum and clubs such as ODC and OCHBC, except the money. Either way you go, you have no idea what kind of group you will end up with and you have no idea how organized/prepared the "leader" is.

There is a huge difference between clubs and forums.

For one thing, no forum, especially places like SummitPost, is really geared for beginners. Sure, they pretend to welcome noobs and all that, but generally they are of, by and for experienced hikers and climbers.

Consider these two vastly different experiences:

Forum: Noob shows up, wants some advice for hiking in the San Gabriels, has NO IDEA where to go, what to wear, etc, starts asking questions. He can expect to get lots of responses, most of them conflicting with each other, and at the end of the day, even after getting tons of advice, still isn't sure what to do. In any case, he's still on his own.

Club: Noob shows up, has NO IDEA where to go, etc. Event leader posts an event that looks attractive, describes a difficulty level that seems reasonable and and has offered to TAKE THE NOOB UP THE TRAIL. All the noob has to do is show up with appropriate footwear.

Completely different experience.

[HikeUp]

That certainly is one possible scenario. It's also possible that noobs get invited along by the experienced people on forums. It may be more intimidating and perhaps less likely but it's still possible. The differences are not substantial enough in my mind to quibble over. They both serve a purpose for different types of people. As a noob, I found infinitely more valuable and relevant information on these forums than I did by looking at Sierra Club and ODC. That is just my experience though, and may not be what others have experienced. Neither is right or wrong.

[simonov]

That certainly is one possible scenario. It's also possible that noobs get invited along by the experienced people on forums.

Oh, that happens, it happened to me (Hi, Fritz!). But it's not something a noob can depend on or expect upon joining a strange forum.

[Taco]

That certainly is one possible scenario. It's also possible that noobs get invited along by the experienced people on forums.

Oh, that happens, it happened to me (Hi, Fritz!). But it's not something a noob can depend on or expect upon joining a strange forum.

Ak and ye shall recieve.

Sometimes.

[AW~]

Club: Noob shows up, has NO IDEA where to go, etc. Event leader posts an event that looks attractive, describes a difficulty level that seems reasonable and and has offered to TAKE THE NOOB UP THE TRAIL. All the noob has to do is show up with appropriate footwear.

Leader implies responsibility while demanding no self-reponsibility? But a a coordinator implies no responsibility but demands self-responsibility? I say both of those are not wise choices...more like the reality is to imply no reponsibility but also demand no self-responsibility either.

Lets take Iron Mtn for example:...under your scenario, noob signs up and brings a 16oz bottle of water. Group goes up the trail and noob runs out of water&likely doesnt say anything until noob really needs water. Now what? Is the leader responsible? Hopefully, yes, the leader should have accounted for that scenario. Is the coordinator responsible? Before someone says no, they should ask themselves if they would really leave another hiker to die on a trail and just say wasnt my fault hiker ran out of water. If you can say yes, ignore the other hiker,then by all means ODC,etc works. But the second you say no, I would help out, then even legally, you have responsibility. My advice to the noob is to understand exactly who are you going with stands on this issue. And a lot of times you dont have to ask as its posted. Some ODC postings will say exactly that they will leave you to fend for yourself, if you twist an ankle the coordinator is continuing without you....if they even noticed you werent around.

[simonov]

Leader implies responsibility while demanding no self-reponsibility? But a a coordinator implies no responsibility but demands self-responsibility? I say both of those are not wise choices...more like the reality is to imply no reponsibility but also demand no self-responsibility either.

People have to make their own choices and their own decisions about what they are comfortable with, and that is spelled out explicitly in the waiver, for those folks who somehow don't actually do that on a daily basis already.

Leaders, coordinators or organizers - whatever you want to call them - lead, coordinate and organize. They do not wipe noses. What they offer is some prior experience with the event in question and a willingness to share their experience with others.

That, too, is pretty explicitly spelled out.

At the end of the day, I believe this entire discussion over responsibility comes down to two essential facts:

1) the participants are all adults (or are accompanied by a responsible parent); and

2) if unpaid volunteer organizers were to be held legally responsible for the decisions of the participants, there would be no organizers, no club.

This is also true of the Sierra Club, though they bracket everything with more rules and regulations and qualifications.

Now, getting to your worst-case example, if clubs and leaders acted in a worst-case manner all the time, there wouldn't be a club for much longer. Event leaders, too, can and do practice some discrimination, regarding how much personal responsibility they wish to take for their charges.

[justinjohnsen]

Given that it's impossible for people to agree upon exactly who is responsible for what in individual vs group on the large scale (invidivdual vs government), not everyone is going to agree on the hiking scale (individual vs hike leader & hiking group)

You're on to something there. My experience has been that established groups (like Sierra Club, or Boy Scouts) are more communal, while internet clubs (like Outdoors Club, Meetup hiking groups) are more libertarian.

But these are only generalizations - tendencies, at best. Every individual hike leader/coordinator/instigator has a different way of doing things.

Most general interest ODC events I've been on (easy to moderate distance, mostly on trail) operate like a Sierra Club O-rated (easy) hike in practice - the difference being the method of waiver signing.

The tougher/more advanced ODC events usually operate differently, more like a group of casual friends. This is usually true when it's stronger or experienced hikers, especially if they already know each other. The more strangers or first-time ODC hikers present, the more cautious the group usually is.

The SC advanced hikes and backpacks I've been on have been smaller, more relaxed groups than the larger easier events. The few I- (class 2) and M-(class 3) rated leaders I've met have been a pleasure to hike with. On Sierra backpack trips, after making camp, I've informed leaders of short treks I planned to do while the majority of the group rested, and never been asked to stay put or sign out.

It seems like no matter which organization, massive hikes with 15 to 40 people are a bitch to manage, and require frequent stops for the leader to keep the group together. Smaller groups operate more freely.

[JMunaretto]

It seems like no matter which organization, massive hikes with 15 to 40 people are a bitch to manage, and require frequent stops for the leader to keep the group together. Smaller groups operate more freely.

and dare I say this points to the need for federalism?

A few of my hikes have unexpectedly gotten over 30 people, but there is no way in hell they are all going to stay together, and frankly, who wants 30 people going up a small path all together? if that happens, I try to assign co-leaders who go at varying paces, and so there is a little spread of control. Works much better

[Taco]

I much prefer Ice Pirate 3-4 man team outings with alcohol involved.