Woman Dies in Fall From Angel's Landing

The park should not allow anyone to go up Angel's Landing without the proper equipment (hiking boots, certain amount of water, etc.) There should be minimum standards set and met before going up. A park ranger should approve the ascent at a checkpoint after meeting such requirements. They should at least post a sign stating the equipment needed to make the climb and a picture of the shoes, etc. with a "X" marked through it.

I read where a parent took a 1 year up on his back. That should be outlawed and a person fined for endangering a minor. Really, no children under 16 should be allowed up. If they can't legally drive a car by themselves prior to that age, they most certainly have no business climbing something this dangerous. Why should we have laws and restrictions for Angel's Landing? To save people from their own arrogance and stupidity.

It's a shame people feel they need a thrill or adrenaline rush to "live life".

If you are planning to climb this landing in the future; make sure you have life insurance, your family may need it.

At the grand canyon, they have signs warning people about the dangers of not having enough water with strapping athletic people who got into trouble and had to be rescued; likewise I think it would be effective if the zion rangers would put up some pictures of good hikers who got into trouble on the trail and posted it up there. Tragedies could be prevented a little more, hopefully.

My daughter & I hiked Angel's Landing 3 years ago--September 2005. She was not quite 11 at the time (very tall for her age, long legs). We read up on it first, including pics & videos, wore appropriate footwear, and approached the hike with respect & foresight. We didn't have any trouble. We hike regularly, but nothing as exposed as AL. She still talks about it at least once a month--it is a memory & accomplishment she'll have for a lifetime. You have to know yourself & whoever you are with; your strengths & weaknesses & respect your instincts. The most important trail advice is above--don't rely on the chains solely--have secure footing without holding on to them. They can be very dangerous--especially when someone in back of you grabs hold & "springs" the chain, making it bounce & fly around--if you are not sure of your footing, you could easily lose it there. In making the choice to take my daughter at her age; the biggest factor was that I knew that first, if she was too scared or unsure to go on, she would tell me; and second, that I knew she'd follow directions immediately (like STOP!) without any attitude or hesitation. Several kids in her Scout troop want me to take them when we go camping in Zion--NO WAY!! Because of those two factors--not sure which ones I could trust to behave. Good luck to anyone trying the hike--it is truly an experience to last a lifetime.

My 11 year old daughter & I ascended to Angel's Landing two days ago. It was an outstanding experience. My wife & I elected to leave our two 7 year old twins down in the valley and they hiked the Riverside trail. I think it's up to each individual to determine whether they can safely proceed on any given "adventure." We certainly don't need rangers to enforce the types of shoes to wear. What about all those people who choose to free-climb on some of the fantastic walls? I'd never do it, but if they wish to take the risk, know the consequences and feel they can handle it...more power to them! I've been on several back-country skiing trips in this country and elsewhere that have substantially more risk than hiking Angel's landing; it would be the end of outdoor adventure as we know it if there was a ranger at every trailhead dictating who was "fit and capable" of going ahead. It's sad when someone dies in an accidental fall, but those who've died did so doing something they enjoyed doing and did so of their own free will. We as a society need to stop worrying so much about having our government officials make sure we live long, and start living well.

Lulu,

Had to laugh at your name of "quitter's corner". My description of that area is that it is like going to the party and not dancing. Thus, in May 2008 I, at almost 61, make the trek all the way to the top. I was just a little over a year post intensive shoulder surgery and not so great of a knee, so I was most delighted when I was able to accomplish this adventure. I don't know that I will ever do it again, i.e. I lived to tell about it and that is my story. Other posters are right about keeping it open; however, the chains do provide a service and I think they should remain there. One girl had her camera fall over the ledge and, thus, lost all of her photos of having been at the top--felt so sorry for her. Some of the folks that died, were, in my opinion, probably not as careful as they should have been as they were experienced and figured that was enough. It was a slow and steady experience for me, i.e. no ridge running from this girl. Can't wait to go back (maybe Sep 09) and get in some of The Narrows this time around.

This is a ridiculous discussion. Close down dangerous trails? Yes if there are too many crazy people killing themselves by mere oversized self-overestimation. That is a phenomenon I found so often in the US. People who do not know what they do think they can do everything. I found this also in US citizens in areas like Nepal. They think they just can challenge and press the good fortune. I think God loves the Americans since so amazing few accidents happen. For me as an experienced hiker and alpinist the angels landing trail is a trifling hike. Although for me it is an easy stroll, I always take care where it is necessary. But I am aware that so many people who do the hike do not really know what they are doing. But in this country everybody is free to walk wherever he wants. Right so, or do you want to close all places where one might fall down or be rammed by a car when crossing a parking lot?

I hiked Angel's Landing in Oct 2007. It was easily the most beautiful experience I've ever had in the outdoors. Much of the ascent (and the view from the summit) feels as if you're flying suspended in mid-air over Zion Canyon.

I'm an experienced hiker, in my mid-thirties, with a reasonable amount of trad rock-climbing experience, and little fear of heights. Even so, I have to admit that the view from quitter's corner (as someone here called it) gave me pause. In my opinion, Angel's Landing deserves to be treated more like a climb- this is a dangerous and hard hike, and deserves respect. If you're thinking of doing AL, here are some pointers:
- Go early in the day, wear a good pair of hiking boots, and carry at least 1-2 liters of water and a decent amount of food.
- Read up a little about climbing technique if you can- I found that my climbing experience came in handy, the chains I agree are somewhat of a crutch, and if you position your weight correctly they're often quite unnecessary.
- Focus on your breathing- most people panic when they're taking short breaths...
- Give yourself at least a couple of extra hours for the last half-mile. Mistakes happen when you're feeling rushed or tired.
- Work on the trail in short stretches, and try not to think too much.

As for myself, once I crossed the first really narrow constriction beyond quitter's corner (about ten or twenty feet into the trail), I stopped crouching, and stood up straight. From there on, the hike was pure exhilaration. I will never forget the light on that day, and the view from the top.

I hiked up Angel's Landing with friends a couple of days ago.
It's a wonderful place and in those warm, dry, benign conditions, was really no more dangerous than many of the world's most beautiful spots. There were signs telling us that people have died there and I think it's down to the individual to decide if they're uncomfortable rather than legislating against personal freedom. I assume safety is why the park authority put the chains there in the first place.
I agree it'd be significantly more dangerous in ice, snow or darkness and this needs to be (and is) made clear.
However, even in bad conditions, a properly prepared hiker who takes it gently would not be at very high risk IMO.

No risk = no reward = a potentially rather unfulfilled life.

that is the dumbest thing i've ever heard...mandatory safety? there are warnings all over. if one sticks to the chains they will stay safe. its usually the avid hikers that die because they think they are more experienced than they really are...thats when mistakes happen

We "chickened out" at the chains, but found a much, much better and far safer view at Observation Point. Glad we turned around and enjoyed the day!