A read through of Up Close and Personal with Ben work sheet explains what actually happened on Ben’s millennium expedition in spring 2000. Thoroughly discuss, with the whole class, the conflict with the French climbers. Students have the opportunity to improvise post-expedition situations.

Social Conflict work sheet allows students to assess conflict in terms of their own lives. Conflict Situation Suggestions is a help sheet that gives students realistic suggestions for improvisation. The teen conflict section is designed to be taught as a separate lesson. Allow ample time for discussion of student conflicts.

Everest Emergency work sheet is an activity encouraging students to reach consensus. Make sure they understand the severity of the situation on the mountain. Hand out the Expedition Members* sheet and instruct them to work in pairs to choose the member of the group who will go on the rescue mission. Have the pairs join another pair; now all four members must reach consensus. Likewise, fours join to make eights. All must agree! Finally, try to reach a whole class consensus. After the exercise, explain to the students why there is no “right” answer.

· NOTE: Each character listed in the “Expedition Members” worksheet is completely fictional; any resemblance to actual persons living or dead is entirely coincidental.

Extending the learning: Study a film that quintessentially represents conflict, such as the classic Twelve Angry Men.

March 18, 2000

I had to spend 4 weeks in the Khumbu Valley last November-December to make sure everything was in place for the expedition. I had to suss out the true situation in terms of climbing Sherpas. Like everywhere else, there's good apples and there's bad apples. The only to find out who works well together, who doesn't, who is well liked and respected, who is honorable and who is not, is to go there and drink with them in their villages, have tea with them in their huts.
Compatibility is so crucial. If you don't have them truly on your side the chances of succeeding are limited. There's always another expedition for them so the challenge is to connect and make it more than just a business deal for them. It helps that our expedition is not going in with a peak-or-die headspace. So many Everest climbers are just peak-baggers. It cheapens the experience. Sure, we're there for a reason, but it's about the path, the experience, not the end.

April 3, 2000

My two principal concerns persist. The technical gremlins are hanging tough, though they haven't threatened our transmissions yet. My hope is that once we reach Base Camp, and are not setting up and breaking down the equipment for travel, we should be able to resolve these technical hiccups. Illness in varying degrees has affected everyone in the expedition except me. Those who were sick in Namche have recovered, but a few others have come down with either tourista or head colds.

April 5, 2000

I spent 48 hours in Pheriche making the trek between bed and toilet like some mindless migrational animal, head hanging, swaying side to side, shuffling in an endless cycle.
Originally, I was thinking of building an acclimatizing hike day into the schedule before we reached Base Camp, but my Sherpas have convinced me to make the push tomorrow. The reason is that a pusa, the ceremonial blessing of a Buddhist Llama to all climbers, is taking place on Friday. A very religious people, the Sherpas would feel uncomfortable climbing without this blessing.

April 10, 2000

Francois Bedard returned to the expedition after spending a few days lower down the mountain in rehab after a stint of altitude-induced headaches. My plan is to leave at 5 a.m. tomorrow for our first passage through the notorious Khumbu icefall. I suggested that Francois stay behind to better acclimatize, but he says he feels no affects from the altitude and wants to join us. I’ve agreed, not wanting his enthusiasm to be dampened, but I’ll keep a close eye on him just the same.

April 13, 2000

I would like to take this opportunity to discuss what I see as questionable ethics in regards to some expeditions' motivation for summitting, and how this distorted desire to conquer what is only a piece of rock and ice leads to not only warped behavior, but an abhorrent value system.
When Francois Bedard was recuperating from his bout of acute mountain sickness at Pheriche, a porter was brought to the medical clinic near death from pulmonary edema. From various sources, I was able to piece this story together: A porter was carrying a load of supplies to a Korean expedition when he came across one of my Sherpas at Lobuche, about a day’s walk from Base Camp. My Sherpa noticed at once that the poor man was struggling badly. He suggested the porter descend at once to Pheriche or Deboche to recover. The porter explained that he really needed the money and if he were late, his paymasters might become critical. What was needed was for the porter to be put immediately into a Gammo bag (a hyperbaric chamber) with a bottle of oxygen to stabilize his condition. Instead, the Koreans explained that they would not sacrifice a bottle of oxygen needed for their summit push, and sent the porter packing.
The next chapter in this tragedy is again in Lobuche where the porter has collapsed on the trail. Pascal, a Quebecois trekker and friend of my climbers, had visited our Camp the previous day. Pascal discovered the porter’s motionless body. He was able to get the porter down to Pheriche by giving him Diamox and paying some other porters to help him with the dying man.
Once at the Pheriche clinic, the doctors immediately called for a helicopter to take the patient back to Kathmandu.
It’s here that Francois learned of the story and was told by the doctors the porter has a slim chance for survival Now, I don’t know this porter, but my guess is he had a wife and kids, and he was trying to support them in the only way he knew how. To have his life weighed against a bottle of oxygen and someone’s need to summit truly boggles the mind. I wrote about this event to ensure that this behavior is on record. My hope is that future expeditions will not follow suit.

April 14, 2000

Tuesday was our first ascent through the notorious Khumbu Icefall. This 700 meter mass of broken, shifting ice with huge hanging blocks and gaping crevasses scares the “bejeezus” out of all who enter it. Technically, the icefall is not difficult with most of the route being fixed with ropes early in the spring. The danger lies in the unpredictability of the glacier. It's always moving, with heaving ice walls threatening to fall, crushing anything in their path. There is no safe passage through the icefall, but there are a few things you can do to lessen the danger: 1) Move as fast as possible. The more time spent ascending or descending just increases one's dependency on the vagaries of an unstable environment. 2) Try to pass through early in the morning before the sun hits the ice. The heat from the sun acts as the agent of change for the glacier. During the middle of the day is when most accidents happen. 3) Have confidence in your climbing. I've seen many climbers take 10 or 15 minutes to cross a tethered ladder bridging a crevasse. If you're tentative, you're more likely to freeze or misstep on the ladders, falling into the void of the crevasse.

April 20, 2000

All four climbers reached Camp II on Monday and returned to Camp I to sleep. Of the four, I was the only one to not struggle, not finding the distance traveled nor the altitude gained of any consequence. Tuesday a decision was reached for Benoit, Claude and Francois to descend to Base Camp to rest while I climbed solo back to Camp II to spend the night.

April 24, 2000

During Claude's and Francois' climb to Camp I had a very scary moment. We were watching their ascent through binoculars, the scene being serene, when a huge avalanche released like a bomb, detonating from the shoulder of Nuptse directly into the Khumbu Ice Fall. It was almost surreal the way the avalanche appeared to move laterally in slow motion towards Francois and Claude. Gravity prevailed and pushed the massive wall of snow and ice below our climbers line by several hundred meters. It was a close call and a graphic reminder that without rhyme or reason, the mountain can take a life in the blink of an eye.
Our fourth and youngest climber, Benoit, has come down with some kind of viral infection that has stolen his energy and created coughing fits that make him vomit. I explained I didn’t want him climbing until he’s 100%. Everest will kick you around the block when fit. It can be especially cruel to those that aren’t. With luck, Benoit should be ready to go within 48 hours. The next 24 hours should prove interesting.
A misgiving: During my descent from Camp II, I came across at least a dozen climbers who were experiencing problems either physically (appearing to be in less than peak shape -- excuse the pun), or technically. I watched in amazement at the poor level of technical climbing used by many. The most galling was at a vertical ice wall of some 20 meters in height where a guide for a commercial expedition was teaching a client how to climb. I don't know about you, but I think teaching basic skills on a perennially lethal mountain is a bit like teaching someone to drive during the Indy 500. Not only dumb, but arguably immoral. How does this happen? Money, and gobs of it. They say money corrupts; well on Everest that is certainly the case. Say a client has $65,000 US to toss around. He or she gets it in their collective head that climbing Everest would be neat. They contact one of several guiding services offering Everest and they join a commercial expedition with other like-minded clients.
Where it gets scary is if these so-called climbers make it to the Death Zone and above, is if anything were to ever happen to the guide, they would be left to save to save themselves without the necessary skills to do so. The disaster of '96 proves this point but obviously some people just won't learn. How does this affect my expedition? If we're up high and something were to happen to a commercial expedition, we would be obligated morally to help, risking not only our summit bid, but our lives as well.

April 27, 2000

I fear the possibility of summitting may be all but gone for one of our climbers. Benoit tried to ascend today, but returned after a short while. He almost passed out in the Khumbu, losing his balance and drive. Obviously he's not recovered from what was ailing him. I fear his expedition is probably over and I am already building his absence in to the summit day equation. The only positive to be drawn from Benoit's struggle is that I know his positive personality and willingness to help the team in any way possible will override any personal disappointment. A great asset to the expedition regardless of his climbing setback, I'll lean on him in the next 2 weeks.
My Sherpas left today to start the process of establishing Camp IV on the South Col. They'll be stocking it with oxygen, tents, stoves, food, etc. and should be ready by May 2 as well. It's also a time for Nima, my Sirdar or Sherpa foreman, to evaluate his men for the final push. We've had preliminary discussions on personnel; on who will be on the summit team, but it will be his decision and I'll respect it.
We've heard that last night a Spanish team burnt one of their tents at Camp III. Strange way to keep warm, luckily no one was hurt!

May 8, 2000

Some significant developments have now taken place. My team is now divided into possibly two summit pushes. Claude and I will leave Tuesday for Camp II and the first summit push. Both of us reached Camp III on Thursday, Claude climbing to just over 7000 meters and myself reaching a little higher at 7200 meters. Benoit struggled in his attempt to reach Camp III. I'm convinced he's still recovering from the effects of his prolonged illness. Francois descended from Camp II on Thursday after succumbing to the affects of altitude after spending many days away from Base Camp. Surprising, because he seemed very strong when first reaching Camp II but was unlucky when bad weather wouldn't allow him to climb to Camp III.
There was friction between us on the morning of Thursday when Francois announced he was descending. I reminded him that I respected any decision he made but wanted to be sure he understood that descending without reaching Camp III probably negated his chance at the only guaranteed summit push. I mentioned this not to pressure him, but to make sure that he understood the repercussions of this decision. Not knowing how badly he was feeling, I didn't want him to make a decision he might regret. Again not for the team's sake, we were already headed up the mountain, but for his sake.
Unfortunately, Francois took offense even though we agreed in Canada before leaving that team success was the goal, not an individual's, and that I guaranteed at least one summit attempt. Any other summit pushes would be based on viability, i.e. weather, timing, oxygen supplies, Sherpa strength, etc.
On reaching Base Camp, we were able to voice our differences in a climber-only meeting, reaching a resolution. I did most of the talking, reminding Francois that I didn't bring him halfway around the world and spend over $40,000 per climber to somehow not support his climb.
I told him repeatedly that his success meant a team success and a team success meant a Ben Webster success. Everest is the land of dreams, and when you affect someone's lifelong dream, emotions can be strong and raw. In the same meeting, I told Benoit he would not be on the first attempt. He took the news well, agreeing with my belief that he is not yet 100 per cent and the Death Zone is not the place to be if you're only partially fit. I felt that a high climb at this time would put him at risk and therefore anyone climbing with him as well. Everest is a hard, pitiless place, and sometimes hard decisions by hard men must be taken.
We are now positioned for the May 15 summit that I had projected in Canada, as long as the weather is benevolent.

1. There is a major disagreement between two Sherpas. Script the altercation. What is the result? How does it affect the climbers? What happens if the Sherpas refuse to work?

2. A Sherpa disagrees with an expedition member. A cultural tradition is not understood by the member maybe something goes horribly wrong at the blessing ceremony. Has one of the climbers angered Sagarmatha, goddess of the sky?

3. A climber who is clearly ill refuses to give up the expedition.

4. Unskilled climbers from other expeditions are shredding the ropes in front of Ben’s group. A debate ensues as whether to climb without the ropes (EXTREMEMLY dangerous) or to take the time to fix the ropes, but maybe not make it to the summit.

5. Nima names the climbers who can proceed from Camp IV to the summit, but Ben disagrees strongly.

6. Khumbu rears its ugly head: an avalanche approaches the group.

7. Crisis at one of the camps. Tent fire?

8. Poor weather prevents correct acclimatization procedures. Go back down to be safe or go up and risk it?

9. Some “peak-baggers” engage in immoral behavior – hogging ropes? Refusing to share oxygen? Ignoring dangerous weather reports?

10. Your own ideas?!

Bryan Murphy: What was the most dangerous aspect of the climb?

Ben Webster: For myself, the greatest danger was the amount of time I spent up high. When you spend 11 days above 21,000 feet the potential for problems are there. I suffered from the effects of high altitude after summit and spending the night at the south col. That was quite a dangerous situation. I felt better once I got down to altitude and the effects diminished.

Jeff Grohs: What was the most difficult task you had to do to complete you climb to the peak?

Ben Webster: The most difficult task was finding the emotional strength to actually attempt the summit on the 17th. The combination of the amount of time I'd spent at high altitude and the problems created by the Quebec climbers I found draining. I always said our goal was to get someone to the summit, not me. I said I didn't think I was the best candidate going in, but individual mandates and the pressures of the media coverage in Quebec created an environment of disillusionment. The media politicized the situation and when I was summitting, instead of feeling energized I felt drained, because of the peripheral influences. In the end, I said it would be a success if anyone summitted, it turned out to be me.

Denis R: Welcome back Ben! The fact that you were the only team member to summit and so many get turned back says a great deal on the effort needed to achieve this challenge. Would you say that the mental aspect is just as or even more important than the physical needs to conquer Everest?

Ben Webster: I think all three elements -- emotional, mental and physical are important. The emotional and mental can be more important. If you have physical problems they will stop you, but you need the desire and the ability to focus on the task. The success rate on Everest is minuscule. There are lots of reasons for that. Having all three at the same time, being strong emotionally, mentally and physically are needed for a successful bid. My experience on the mountain is that the people who try to climb Everest are the most motivated and strong personalities that I've ever come across. With such a high failure rate, obviously you need all three at the same time, with the right weather. You need a dash of luck.

Julie: Was the weather worse this year than normal? It seemed people had to wait a long time for a chance to summit.

Ben Webster: It was an unstable year, weather-wise. There were no early windows. Combined with the projection for an early monsoon, there was pressure on teams to push even in marginal conditions. For my own summit bid, the satellite forecast was for only 15 hours of good weather. We knew we had to climb very fast, very aggressive to capitalize on that opening. In a normal year you wouldn't attempt it without two or three days of good solid weather. They got a big high for four or five days later on. But nobody knew that was going to come. The potential for the monsoon to come might have locked people out.

Lou: Are too many people trying to climb Everest? Should there be tougher controls on who can climb?

Ben Webster: I wouldn't say the number is unreasonable. But some unskilled people shouldn't try it. But it's an expression of freedom. Mountains have been a place for people to do what they want to do.

CUBS: Were you able to do everything you wanted to try, was the climb everything you expected?

Ben Webster: No I wasn't able to do everything. The goal was to have all four climbers on the summit and that didn't happen. It was everything I thought it would be, but my projections for the climb and the summit are much lower than most Everest climbers. The average Everest climber buys into the whole mythology making it a greater achievement than it is, with the summit taking on unrealistic proportions. It is a challenge, but it is a piece of rock and ice and success on it doesn't make you a greater person and failure doesn't make you a lesser person. I'm not trying to de-romanticize the experience, just, in my own mind, keep it in perspective. For me, it was an experience, one of a dozen I've had and with luck I'll do another dozen. I don't define myself by this one achievement and I question those who do.

Loulou: Why did your expedition conclude so badly? Was it simply because you are an anglophone and there were communication problems with the francophones?

Ben Webster: The pressures from the reporters caused problems. The stories found in the papers simply said that the problem is the English leader. The real story, that they neglected to write, is that their deeds created a climate of division. I read in the paper that Francois Bedard said I had used all the oxygen. The truth is that we had 21 bottles of oxygen. Nazir used six for his two tries at the summit. The reason I gave him some is that no one on my team was in a position to climb that high. It's easy to say 'Ben gave away the oxygen'. But it is also possible to buy oxygen from other teams on the mountain. For example, Christine Boskoff purchased oxygen while up on the mountain. Another reporter said that Francois didn't climb because he lacked oxygen. He decided on his own not to climb. These are the elements that weren't reported in the media. It's easier to blame the anglophone than it is to write the truth. I have letters to prove my version. Was language a problem? Yes, sometimes.

Paul Labrecque: Will you speak to the other three again?

Ben Webster: Benoit Robitaille, yes, Francois Bedard, never. I found he had a problem with a leader and the English. I found after he decided just to speak French with the other climbers that he said different things than he did in English. For Claude, I have lots of time. Again, it's the reporters who created a climate of conflict. We could discuss what was written in the paper, it wasn't all correct, but it's not the first time a reporter has played with someone's words.

K Scobie: Do you think the division experienced by your team could have been avoided? Do the problems encountered taint the accomplishment?

Ben Webster: Yes, they could have been avoided. I made a decision based on Claude's recommendation. I could have brought in an Alberta climber, but Claude recommended Francois, based on his reputation. I agreed to that, thinking the dynamic would work better. I knew Claude and Benoit and thought it would be best to bring in someone they felt comfortable with. I was trying to avoid a French-English split. Claude spent a week apologizing for bringing along a self absorbed, immature climber. As an example, the decision to run two summit pushes was based on the fact that Francois and Benoit had not touched camp 3. 95 per cent of all climbers on Everest will tell you need to reach that level before attempting the summit. That's recognized Everest thinking. There are two many health risks. If Francois had gotten sick or had trouble it would be jeopardized his health and the bid. I chose to keep harmony in the team as best I could after his blow up after not being included by allowing him to join us. But by not climbing high he put himself in danger. He created problems in the team and then didn't push up the mountain. It is mindboggling. Did it diminish the success? No, because the mandate was always to have a team member summit. Was it lessened on a personal level? Certainly, the animosity created by Francois hurt. It's like the Atlanta Braves feel about John Rocker, the difference is that we eat, sleep and live with the same people 24 hours a day.

Paul: There seemed to be rivalry between you and Byron Smith (another climber). Did your teams compete? Or work together?

Ben Webster: They didn't compete against each other and we didn't work together. On the mountain you are so wrapped up in your own logistics and schedule that it becomes difficult. The other thing is that Byron, who we were supposed to work with, made it clear last year that he had no interest in working with me or anyone else. I took him at this word. I didn't have interaction with some of the other Canadian climbers.

Phil Gaudet: Right on, Ben great to see more Canadians making things happen! At any point did you feel that this was just to much to handle and all you wanted to do was give it up and go home?

Ben Webster: Definitely, I spent several days at camp 4 in the death zone and my first night I thought the summit push wasn't going to happen. I radioed base camp that I was descending the next day. That was based on emotional burnout. The politics of the climb, people have to keep in mind, the pressure was extreme because of the media and the play it was getting Quebec. The politicizing of the project on the personal level and through the media was pronounced. I felt tired from trying to keep everything going. I honestly thought I wouldn't have a summit push. Secondly, I had with my head Sherpa a discussion and on Claude's inability to get to the South Col and felt that disappointment was weighing heavily on me. I wasn't in the best mental frame to summit, I also felt the conditions weren't ideal. I knew our team would probably only have one push and since the other climbers couldn't get up high it was up to me to succeed. I knew my Sherpas on the advance push said the snow was still deep. I thought succeeding was a 50/50 effort on the first day. I woke up feeling strong and rejuvenated and chose to climb on that day.

Julie, Montreal: Would you go with Quebecers again?

Ben Webster: Yes, because but on the next expedition I would only take people who I know, and not take someone on the recommendation of others. I hope to have the opportunity, because at the end of the day, I don't want to base my decisions on a bad experience with one person. I say again, it was the reporters and the media who created this environment. If they don't tell the truth, it makes for a difficult situation. If you travel with reporters, you need to choose team members who are comfortable in this environment. If you are going to say something, you have to think about the impact and not with your emotions because the reporters will write what you said.

• It’s the plane ride home from Kathmandu to Toronto. Script the conversation between the climbers.
  (Characters: Ben, Francois, Claude, Benoit, Bryan Smith)

• A month after the expedition, Ben is giving an Everest talk at a national bookstore in Montreal. The Quebec media only want to know what happened with Benoit, Claude and Francois.
  (Characters: Ben, radio reporter, Montreal Gazette reporter, university media student)

• One day in Montreal, Ben drops into a Deppaneur (corner store) to grab a snack. Who should he run into but Claude and Francois.
  (Characters, Ben: Claude, Francois, Dep manager)

• Ben has to meet with his sponsors to explain why he was the only one to summit. He must convince them their money was well spent, despite the negative press the expedition received.
  (Characters: Female sponsor, male sponsor, Ben)

• Use “I-statements” when talking about your feelings of anger, rather than “you statements”. “You statements” tend to be aggressive and attacking and usually bring a very defensive or counter-attacking response. For example, it is better to say, “I felt very angry when you didn’t phone,” rather than, “You made me so angry when you didn’t phone.”

• Avoid name-calling (eg: butthead, liar). Terms like these usually escalate the anger and make it harder to sort through the disagreement.

• Avoid emotive terms. Words like “always” and “never” tend to increase defensiveness. For example, don’t say: “You’re always late!” Words like “stupid” and “dumb” tend to have similar effects.

• Don’t bring up the past. Anger tends to escalate in unhelpful ways when one person or the other brings up the past. For example, “And this isn’t the first time you’re late. Last week-end, and three times last month ...”

• Stay focussed on the issue. Don’t bring in other problems or areas of disagreement; that makes it hard to sort things through.

• Try to adopt a joint problem-solving perspective. Ask, “What can we do so this doesn’t happen again?”

• At age 16, you decide to come home at 1 a.m. on Sunday morning after being told to be home by midnight at the latest. Mom and Dad are upset.

• A sporting competition has been decided by a poor umpiring decision. There are some angry team members on one side, a referee and a team member from the winning side on the other.

• Saturday morning is usually spent doing chores. You decide to sneak out early in the morning to head to the mall to meet your pals. Your parents are less than pleased.

• You worked very hard to make the school dance a success. It went great until a few students showed up drunk and destroyed the buffet table. Everyone is sent home. You decide to confront them Monday morning at school.

• A teacher expects a big project to be handed in today; your class has known about it for over a week. Two students don’t hand in anything. The teacher is furious.

• You’ve been borrowing CD ROMS from a friend to play games on your family desktop. One of them had a virus and has corrupted the computer. Your older sister, Mom and Dad are equally pissed off.

• You have a part-time job after school one afternoon a week. You make a mistake taking stock and your manager freaks out – the whole inventory has to be counted again.

• Your teachers have voted to work to rule, which means you won’t have any extracurricular activities this term. You and a friend try to explain to the principal how important these clubs are.

• One of your best “friends” decides your girlfriend/boyfriend isn’t right for you and does his or her best to sabotage the relationship. The three of you end up in a shouting match.

Every member of your group summitted Mt. Everest! The thrill, however, is long gone. As you were delicately picking your way through the Khumbu icefall, a tremendous avalanche swept away your expedition leader. He was last seen clinging precariously to one of the ladders like this:

Confused, scared and disorientated, you’ve all somehow managed to claw your way back up to Camp I. Without a clear leader, the group is in chaos. It is essential you get in touch with Base Camp as soon as possible because your radio is dead, you have very little food and no medicine or oxygen. Your group is thirsty, hungry, cold and a few are having trouble breathing. To make matters worse, a storm is brewing. You’re stuck in here: