For decades, the path to Mount Everest has been paved with ambition, money, and varying degrees of preparation. But if the Government of Nepal has its way, the "ticket to ride" is about to get significantly harder to punch. A new tourism bill, currently making its way through parliament, proposes a strict new prerequisite that could change the commercial expedition landscape forever.
The Core Proposal: A Himalayan Prerequisite
The headline-grabbing rule is simple but severe: Aspiring Everest climbers must first summit a 7,000-meter (22,965 ft) peak specifically within Nepal.
Previously, reputable guide services required "proven high-altitude experience." This could come from Aconcagua (6,961m) in Argentina, Denali (6,190m) in Alaska, or Peak Lenin (7,134m) in Tajikistan. Under the new proposal, those summits would no longer count as a qualifier for an Everest permit.
Beyond the 7,000m Rule: Other Key Changes
While the experience requirement is stealing the spotlight, the bill includes a suite of other changes aimed at safety and economic control:
- No More Solo Climbs: A total ban on solo climbing and unsupported expeditions. Every climber must be accompanied by a guide.
- Mandatory Nepali Guides: A requirement for a licensed Nepali guide for every two climbers, reinforcing the employment of local Sherpas.
- Price Hike: The permit fee for foreign climbers during the spring season is set to rise from $11,000 to $15,000.
- Eco-Rules: Stricter waste management protocols, including the mandatory use of biodegradable "poop bags" to be carried off the mountain.
The Controversy: Safety or Protectionism?
The reaction from the global climbing community has been swift and divided.
The Argument for Safety
Supporters argue that Everest has become a playground for "extreme tourists" who lack basic crampon skills. By forcing climbers to tackle a Nepali 7,000er (like Himlung Himal or Baruntse), the government ensures they have experienced the specific logistical, cultural, and atmospheric conditions of the Himalayas before stepping onto the Big One.
The Skeptics' View
Critics point out a few flaws in the logic:
- Not All Peaks Are Equal: A technical ascent of Denali is arguably better preparation for Everest than a guided "walk-up" of a non-technical 7,000m peak in Nepal.
- Economic Motives: By invalidating climbs in the Andes or Alaska, Nepal effectively forces climbers to buy two expeditions in Nepal, doubling the tourism revenue.
- Bottlenecks: There is a fear that "easier" 7,000m peaks in Nepal will now become dangerously overcrowded as everyone rushes to tick their prerequisite box.
When Will This Happen? Status: Pending
It is important to note that this is not law yet. The bill has passed the National Assembly (Upper House) but still needs to clear the House of Representatives and receive Presidential assent.
Most experts, including industry insiders like Alan Arnette, believe it is unlikely to be fully enforced for the Spring 2026 season due to the slow legislative process. However, climbers planning for 2027 and beyond should start looking at Nepal's 7,000m inventory seriously.
