Everest Climbing Rules To Be Changed
Nepal’s draft law to limit Everest permits to climbers with prior experience on 7,000-metre peaks aims to reduce overcrowding, improve safety, and curb mountaineering deaths. But will it balance safety with tourism? Explore the pros and cons of this new regulation.
In a move aimed at curbing overcrowding and ensuring a safer experience for climbers, Nepal has unveiled a draft law that will only issue Everest permits to those with prior experience scaling at least one of the country’s 7,000-metre peaks. Now, for the uninitiated, that’s quite a height to wrap your head around, considering Mount Everest itself looms at a staggering 8,849 metres above sea level. But Nepal, with its towering peaks and towering ambitions, is taking this step in the hope of reducing the “death zone” queues — a real buzzkill for anyone hoping for a pleasant, scenic mountaineering adventure.
The country, which heavily relies on tourism, trekking, and the adrenaline rush of mountaineering for foreign exchange, has been caught in the crossfire of criticism for permitting too many climbers — many of whom are, shall we say, a bit green around the gills when it comes to high-altitude expeditions. Picture it: hundreds of climbers stacked up in the “death zone” like sardines, all gasping for air as they try to reach the summit, a less-than-ideal situation when natural oxygen is in short supply.
The result? Long queues at the top, a surge in deaths, and general chaos. In 2023 alone, at least 12 climbers lost their lives on Everest, and another five vanished into the ether. The year before, eight climbers didn’t make it. With Nepal issuing 478 permits last year, it seems the mountain may be hosting more climbers than it can comfortably accommodate. It’s as though Everest has become a bit of a free-for-all, and, let’s be honest, nobody wants to queue up for an hour to take a selfie at the summit — especially if it might cost you your life.
Under the proposed law, climbers seeking an Everest permit will need to provide evidence of having scaled a 7,000-metre peak within Nepal’s borders. But, as is the way of these things, not everyone is happy with this new rule. International expedition operators are up in arms, suggesting that the requirement should be expanded to include any 7,000-metre peak worldwide. After all, there are mountains in places like the Alps and the Andes that are just as tough to climb, and would surely serve as better preparation than simply adding a few more 7,000-metre peaks to Nepal’s roster.
So, what’s the final verdict? Well, it’s clear that Nepal has a tough nut to crack here. With the country relying on mountaineering tourism, introducing stricter rules could be a double-edged sword. On one hand, it could reduce the risk of death and injury on Everest, and encourage more responsible, prepared climbers. On the other, it might make the mountain a tad less accessible to adventure-seekers, potentially putting a dent in Nepal’s economy.
In the end, the law seems to be a step in the right direction, but whether it strikes the right balance between safety and tourism remains to be seen. After all, it’s one thing to climb Everest, and another entirely to climb the political mountain that comes with regulating it. As the draft law moves through Nepal’s National Assembly, we’ll be watching with bated breath — and probably a good bit of oxygen, just in case.
What's Your Reaction?
