- Experience thresholds, medical checks and new accountability rules could reshape the future of Everest expeditions
- Rescuers and veteran climbers back reforms designed to stop underprepared adventurers from turning Everest into a deadly bottleneck
KATHMANDU, Nepal
At nearly 8,400 meters (over 27,500 feet) above sea level, in the thin, unforgiving air of Mt. Everest’s “death zone,” Indian climbers Chetna Sahoo and her husband Pradip hovered between life and death.
Their supplemental oxygen cylinders were empty, their hands and feet severely frostbitten, and both had lost consciousness, unable to descend from the mountain’s upper slopes.
This was the spring climbing season of 2016, and had a team of Sherpa rescuers not intervened, the couple would likely have perished high on Everest.
Driven by a long-held ambition to stand atop the world’s highest peak, the pair had paid an expedition agency to guide them to the summit despite lacking sufficient high-altitude experience.
Their struggle not only endangered their own lives but also threatened others, as they blocked fixed climbing ropes along narrow ridges used by descending climbers.
“We, along with their guide Phurba, helped bring them down to Camp II, where helicopter rescue is possible, and they were airlifted to the mountain’s base,” Lakpa Sherpa, one of the rescuers, recalled in a conversation with Anadolu.
Recalling their condition, he added: “I have seen hundreds of such scenes on Everest, if not thousands.”
Lakpa, who now runs an expedition agency, says a growing number of aspiring climbers believe Everest can be conquered with money alone. Some climbers seek sponsorships, hire low-cost expedition operators and attempt Everest directly from sea level.
Nepal is moving to address this influx of inexperienced climbers, which authorities say has led to overcrowding and safety risks, among other problems.
A proposal to ban climbers lacking experience on a 7,000-meter (22,965 feet) peak in Nepal was passed by the parliament’s upper house this week, and the lower chamber is also expected to vote it through before the March 5 elections.
When ambition turns deadly
Since Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay first summited Everest in 1953, no formal rule has barred individuals from attempting the climb.
Anyone able to pay royalties, agency fees and personal expenses can obtain a permit.
Under this system, even inexperienced climbers can attempt Everest. Some arrive without knowing how to properly use equipment or acclimatize to altitude, problems that become critical in the mountain’s thin air.
According to rescuers, the Sahoo couple had previously turned back after avalanches and earthquakes disrupted attempts to reach base camp. Their eventual ascent brought them into the death zone – and into grave danger.
They were fortunate to encounter rescuers, but not all climbers are as lucky. “Climbing Everest on the first attempt isn’t an easy task,” Lakpa said. “You need solid climbing experience before attempting it. People need to realize that life is more important than climbing a mountain.”
Several deaths on the peak have been linked to prolonged waits at extreme altitude, with many victims trapped in the death zone for hours due to traffic jams near the summit.
In 2019, for instance, 11 climbers died on Everest, even though there were no major disasters such as avalanches or storms.
The tragedies sparked global criticism and prompted questions about Nepal’s regulation of climbing expeditions. International media pressed then-Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli on the government’s failure to manage overcrowding and safety risks.
Mountaineering safety became a national political issue. Lawmakers raised concerns in parliament, and legal petitions called for regulation of the growing number of climbers.
Under mounting pressure, the government formed a study panel comprising tourism officials, expedition organizers and mountaineering experts. The team identified multiple safety issues and recommended barring climbers without experience on peaks of at least 7,000 meters.
Industry welcomes regulations
For years, those recommendations remained unimplemented. Now, nearly eight years after the initial calls for reform, Nepal has moved to regulate Everest expeditions.
This week, the National Assembly approved Tourism Bill 2081, aimed at overhauling the climbing industry. Officials involved in drafting the legislation say barring inexperienced climbers could reduce fatalities on the world’s highest mountain.
The proposed law would also require recent medical reports from climbers before permits are issued.
Another change is that Nepal’s Tourism Department would now officially determine fatalities on the mountain, and expedition agencies – long accused of abandoning bodies and listing climbers as missing – would be held accountable for retrieving bodies from high altitude.
The bill also proposes environmental fees to fund cleanup efforts and support Sherpa communities.
Regarding the timeframe for its enforcement, Himal Gautam, a director at the Tourism Department, said: “Let’s see how fast the process moves. Based on the act, new regulations must be drafted and enacted, so it will take some time.”
Tourism entrepreneurs, guides and veteran climbers have broadly welcomed the move to restrict inexperienced climbers.
“It’s good for the climbing industry,” said Lal Bahadur Jirel, who suffered severe frostbite during the 2019 summit traffic jam. “This will also help diversify climbing to other parts of the country where many smaller mountains remain unclimbed.”
Last August, to promote alternative destinations, Nepal’s Tourism Department opened 97 mountains for free climbing permits for two years. The government has also increased climbing royalties to $15,000 per foreign climber beginning this spring season, aiming to reduce overcrowding.
For rescuers like Lakpa, Everest remains both a place of triumph and tragedy – where ambition meets reality, and where experience can mean the difference between life and death.
“If mountain tourism is to be sustainable, the government must enforce these measures soon,” Lakpa said.
