 Poster: A snowHead
|
A quick google suggests Whistler hasn't suffered an inbounds avalanche in the last 10 years - there were some fatalities in 2009 but it would appear the victims were skiing in closed areas. I'm going to Whistler in a couple of weeks and I won't be taking beacon etc. The whole point of remaining inbounds is to be able to ski without having to constantly think about the avalanche risk. Ski patrol will be working on the assumption that no one is thinking about it because for the majority of skiers that's likely the case....
I was at Sunshine on Friday, the Avy was 4,3,3 trending to 4,4,3 and I was amazed at the number of people following the lemming line out of bounds....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Part of the confusion here is the OP suggesting that transceivers, which they are taking, are required by the resort for some inbounds areas which indicates an element of risk even though all precautions are taken by the resort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
@jedster, so much in bound adventures to be had in whistler from steeps and alpine bowls and tree skiing that im sure you won't need your avi gear , but if the other bonus at whistler is the lift served back country that is easily accessible without skins , that if you decide to do some slack country , hiring avi equipment is easy if needed
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@Ozboy. Agreed. I personally think that (as has been suggested earlier in the thread) the main objective there is just to limit access somewhat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Ozboy wrote: |
| Part of the confusion here is the OP suggesting that transceivers, which they are taking, are required by the resort for some inbounds areas which indicates an element of risk even though all precautions are taken by the resort. |
| sweaman22 wrote: |
| @Ozboy. Agreed. I personally think that (as has been suggested earlier in the thread) the main objective there is just to limit access somewhat. |
That's what everybody say (and assume). It maybe the case. But,
I've seen the line in Big Sky where they require the beeper. The patrol shed was on top of the run.
Let's look at how a party would (or SHOULD) ski a line with avalanche potential: 1st skier drops in, ski to a "safe point" and waits, 2nd skier then drops in...
Now, assume the 1st skier triggers the slide and got buried. The 2nd skier would ski from the top down to where he think the 1st skier got buried and start searching.
Patrol in the shed would have seen the slide too. They would start skiing down, perhaps 30 seconds later than the 2nd skier as they jump into their skis. They would then be doing the probing and digging, assuming the 1st skier already got a signal fixed in that 30 seconds!
(if it's the 2nd skier that got buried, it would take an additional minute or two for patrol to ski down to the starting point of the 1st skier)
Point being, patrol are there on hand to do the actual rescue. They're not coming from other part of the mountain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Never needed any avi gear inbounds anywhere in NA nor did we see any signs recommending it (that I remember) but was essential during our backcountry guided excursions both for tours and heli/ cat boarding. I am looking at investing in my own gear now as doing more backcountry. I'd recommend to definitely take transeivers and the rest can be hired if really worried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
I've seen the line in Big Sky where they require the beeper. The patrol shed was on top of the run.
|
You are seeing what you want to see. It's a traverse from the hut to the top of the run, if the goal was to put it above the run it would not be where it is. It's clearly positioned next to the top of the lift as is common for most patrol huts for practical reasons. The patrol are there to cover the whole of lone mountain not just big couloir, but yes they would rescue although I don't think in the resort history there has ever been an avalanche there?!
I'm surprised you ever leave the house with all the associated risks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jedster wrote: |
| Are the same people saying they would carry equipment if they were staying on piste in France? Does that mean that 95%+ of European skiers are taking silly risks by not carrying all the gear on piste? |
Not exactly same. It's pretty hard to compare piste and untracked snow, even if controlled. There's literary zero percent chances for avalanche on piste, while there's never 100% safety on untracked snow, regardless how much it was checked and controlled. But then again, everyone does what they feel it's smartest idea. If they think it's impossible to trigger avi inbound then feel free skiing without avi gear there. Not so little number of inbound slides (and fatalities) just last season prove it's not all that safe as someone tries to tell, but honestly, I don't really care what other people do.
PS: If all is 100% safe, why some places require transceiver to enter them? There's no need for transceiver if there's no chance for slides.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
I wear a beep sometimes when skiing inbound in N America but not usually shovel and probe. Usually those obviously carrying those are planning on out of bounds riding. I'm ok with the ethics/risk of this given I'm usually skiing on my own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be wise to have a shovel if you're tree skiing? Okay so the inbound terrain is controlled, but surely tree wells are still a risk?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@primoz,
| Quote: |
Not exactly same. It's pretty hard to compare piste and untracked snow, even if controlled. There's literary zero percent chances for avalanche on piste
|
Sorry but that is nonsense. Lots of pistes are UNDER open unpisted slopes and at risk of being hit by avalanches if the ski patrol doesn't do its job properly. We have seen incidents like this in recent years where avalanches have crossed open pistes in Europe (I agree very infrequently).
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Gainz wrote: |
| Never needed any avi gear inbounds anywhere in NA nor did we see any signs recommending it (that I remember) but was essential during our backcountry guided excursions both for tours and heli/ cat boarding. I am looking at investing in my own gear now as doing more backcountry. I'd recommend to definitely take transeivers and the rest can be hired if really worried. |
In my (albeit limited) experience - heli operators will handout transceivers and would actually prefer that you used theirs. It was some years ago but I remember the attitude to carrying shovel and probes was "was you can if you want but we carry loads of gear in teh heli which would be on the scene very quickly so I wouldn't bother". The guides of course carried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jedster wrote: |
@primoz,
| Quote: |
Not exactly same. It's pretty hard to compare piste and untracked snow, even if controlled. There's literary zero percent chances for avalanche on piste
|
Sorry but that is nonsense. Lots of pistes are UNDER open unpisted slopes and at risk of being hit by avalanches if the ski patrol doesn't do its job properly. We have seen incidents like this in recent years where avalanches have crossed open pistes in Europe (I agree very infrequently). |
There's probably 0% chance of the actual piste sliding, but slides *on to* the piste obviously do occur - like the other week in Andermatt - just extremely rarely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| jedster wrote: |
| ... In my (albeit limited) experience - heli operators will handout transceivers and would actually prefer that you used theirs. It was some years ago but I remember the attitude to carrying shovel and probes was "was you can if you want but we carry loads of gear in the heli which would be on the scene very quickly so I wouldn't bother". The guides of course carried. |
A bit OT, but ... Industry practice changed some years ago from what you experienced. Some operators (eg Wiegele) always provided guest shovel packs and encouraged their use, but it wasn't mandatory. These days, all operators I've used...- Everyone must carry gear and be trained in using it. No exceptions.
- The tail guide and at least some other guests have radios.
- The guides (front and back) carry additional gear.
The idea is that the lead guide is most likely to go down, and everyone behind is the 1st line of defence. If they fail the cavalry arrives with significant trained resources. The protocol is broadly to 1st call it in (to get the cavalry including clinical support out), then rescue. Some operators provide and mandate air bags, others don't. You're right that it's better to use the operator's transceivers because then everyone knows how to turn them off.
I always used a shovel pack as you need one to sit on for lunch.
---
| sm wrote: |
| Wouldn't it be wise to have a shovel if you're tree skiing? Okay so the inbound terrain is controlled, but surely tree wells are still a risk? |
I've never really come across "proper" tree wells at a resort. That terrain gets a lot of traffic so I think they're not nearly as significant as in the back country. Still, people do now and then die in wells at resorts, so that's a fair point. It's a very rare scenario though... you'd have to be riding with a buddy. The buddy system would need to work (you'd need to know the other person was down). You'd need to find them using the transceiver. Then they'd need to be unconscious so you did not have time to call the cavalry for an extraction, and you'd need not to be able to simply pull them out.
The argument "carrying more gear could not make it any riskier" leads to the inevitable conclusion that it's safest to stay at home.
The issue isn't so much deciding which of two options is the more risky, it's determining if it makes a significant difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| jedster wrote: |
| Sorry but that is nonsense. Lots of pistes are UNDER open unpisted slopes and at risk of being hit by avalanches if the ski patrol doesn't do its job properly. We have seen incidents like this in recent years where avalanches have crossed open pistes in Europe (I agree very infrequently). |
Well we obviously have different point of view, experience and knowledge on avi issues. But let it be this way. As I wrote, I'm perfectly fine if someone goes skiing out of piste with no gear, as long as it's not with me. And there's pretty much zero chance we will ever ski together (I know never say never, as I have actually been skiing with few guys from here even though I never though I will) so all is cool 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| SnoodlesMcFlude wrote: |
| Wouldn't it be wise to have a shovel if you're tree skiing? Okay so the inbound terrain is controlled, but surely tree wells are still a risk? |
The issue with tree wells is usually getting stuck in them so you lack maneouvrability. In such circumstances extracting a shovel from a pack on your back is all but impossible and if you can do so you are probably in a position to climb out anyway. If your partner is in one or you happen upon a stranger you can probably pull them out or at least make an airway with your poles etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@primoz,
what does this even mean in a North American context?:
| Quote: |
goes skiing out of piste with no gear
|
Lots of runs are:
1. not bashed
2. avalanche patrolled
3. in bounds
are these "out of piste"?
Oh and do you take my point that people have been caught in avalanches on open groomed pistes in Europe?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@philwig,
| Quote: |
A bit OT, but ... Industry practice changed some years ago from what you experienced. Some operators (eg Wiegele) always provided guest shovel packs and encouraged their use, but it wasn't mandatory. These days, all operators I've used...
Everyone must carry gear and be trained in using it. No exceptions
|
That sounds right for the lodge operators.
I've booked a day with Whistler Heli for me and the two kids. I'd be a bit surprised if they find time in the day to give us proper avalanche rescue training. As it happens we are trained but I bet a bunch of the clients won't be.
I do appreciate the difference in the whole experience between Whistler Heli and the lodge operators.
Years ago when I was at Mica Heli we did do transceiver training when we arrived but weren't encouraged to carry shovels and probes. I wouldn't be at all surprised that that has changed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@jedster, yes this is out of piste. Point is not terminology but actual snow. With packed snow on piste, maintained with snowcats, conditions for avalanches are gone, and as I wrote, there's zero chance for slides on prepared pistes. On terrain not prepared this way, you can never be 100% sure things are safe. Sure they made checks, they might even throw some bombs, yet things slide.
As for last part... yes, people have been caught in avis on pistes in Europe, problem is that you seem to mix reasons for this accident. It's not that there was spontaneous slide coming down the piste catching people on piste. In pretty much every single such case, reason for slide triggering was human skiing on avi prone terrain during conditions that he shouldn't even be there, and in some cases shouldn't be there regardless of conditions. In certain countries this can actually mean criminal lawsuits etc. So again, if people behave like they should, there's no chance to get caught in avi on piste. Out of piste (even inbounds) things are not so clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
In pretty much every single such case, reason for slide triggering was human skiing on avi prone terrain during conditions that he shouldn't even be there
|
yes, agreed. But given you and I can't stop someone else being stupid like that, do we need to carry gear on piste in case they are?
I'd argue no because the probability of such an event is tiny.
But then that would be my argument about skiing inbounds in NA too - the chance of being caught in such an event is tiny.
If you want to reduce the chance of dying on a piste skiing or inbounds skiing holiday then you should almost certainly focus on making your journey to the resort as safe as possible rather than carrying avalanche gear in avalanche controlled areas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
^ This. I always say that the motorway drive to the mountains in Spain worries me considerably more than avalanches in controlled places - and with good reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know it's almost definitional but sounds like ski patrol really screwed up by allowing hike to terrain to open - I know of several places in the US where they would be much more conservative. And i've been places where patrol have specifically addressed the lift line at the beginning of the day saying - "look we're really worried about this - ski with a partner , beep and exercise conservative protocol" or "trust us on this - these things will remain closed for a reason"
There have been several inbounds avies in the US already this season but it seems some fairly heroic traversing and/or grey areas around whether they were really obeying all signage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
I agree with probability of getting into avi on piste being small enough not to worry about. Probability of getting killed in inbound avi is not that minor. As I wrote, just based on 2018/2019 season data, 8% of avi fatalities (2 out of 25) were inbound (for 2019/2020 current percentage is at 33% of all victims being inbound). That's pretty big percentage out of all avi fatalities, that happened somewhere where based on several here, is perfectly safe and controlled without chances for incident.
Sure, I agree when you look at this based on number of skiers and number of days out there, chances are small, but same goes for backcountry/out of bound too, yet everyone (at least everyone normal) carries transceiver, probe and shovel there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| I know it's almost definitional but sounds like ski patrol really screwed up by allowing hike to terrain to open |
I admit I'm not from US or anywhere similar, where you always try to blame someone else for your bad decisions, so maybe my point of view is different. But personally I would say only you yourself are responsible for your own decisions. Personally I wouldn't blame ski patrol for this. They might screw up, I agree, and if you sell something as safe terrain and this happens, they did screw up. But on the end, guys who ski it made decision to ski it, and that's also my point in all this writing here. You can't trust 100% someone else that they did perfect job and made terrain, that is impossible to be made 100% safe, 100% safe. You as skier, are the only one responsible for decision if you will drop in or say "well this doesn't seem safe enough for me"
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Re the first of your latter two posts: I'm not sure that that's a meaningful comparison, though. Perhaps almost everyone skiing out of bounds was was super careful and got it right. You should only compare in-bounds avalanche deaths with in-bounds skier numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Fyi I bought a shovel at Walmart for $25 yesterday. It's not BCA but still made of aluminium, feels sturdy enough and is designed to dig cars/trucks out of snow. For less than the price of a round of beers I can dig my friends out. Even if the risk is 0.000001% I don't want to have to risk looking into their mothers in the eye and tell them their son/daughter is dead because I didn't have a shovel and probe on me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jedster wrote: |
...That sounds right for the lodge operators.
I've booked a day with Whistler Heli for me and the two kids. I'd be a bit surprised if they find time in the day to give us proper avalanche rescue training. As it happens we are trained but I bet a bunch of the clients won't be.
I do appreciate the difference in the whole experience between Whistler Heli and the lodge operators..... |
I run the booking system for Powder Mountain in Whistler and ride there now and then.
As you suggest it's not the same product as lodge-based stuff. However as daily operators sell "by the run", and the major cost is the machine's time,
there's a great deal of non-heli time available which training easily fits into. I'd expect you'll be trained in use of shovel and probe plus transceiver with a few practice searches.
With the snow cat all the training except practice searches are done in the cat on the way up the mountain, as the dynamic is completely different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| boarder2020 wrote: |
I'm surprised you ever leave the house with all the associated risks! |
The roof could collapse, the house could burn down, a lamp could fall off the ceiling and hit your on the head! Shouldn't you be wearing helmets in the house? Admittedly, sleeping with one can be a tad uncomfortable.
Associated risks are everywhere, including IN the house. So better get out!
People seem to forget, skiers go skiing because it's THRILLING to slide down at speed. Whether they want to admit it or not, they're courting danger for the thrill. So, avoidance is not the answer. And amongst all this talk about inbound avi danger, how many wear spine/back protectors skiing on piste? The risk of being hit by out of control skiers are far higher than being buried by inbound avalanches!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| primoz wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| I know it's almost definitional but sounds like ski patrol really screwed up by allowing hike to terrain to open |
I admit I'm not from US or anywhere similar, where you always try to blame someone else for your bad decisions, so maybe my point of view is different. But personally I would say only you yourself are responsible for your own decisions. Personally I wouldn't blame ski patrol for this. They might screw up, I agree, and if you sell something as safe terrain and this happens, they did screw up. But on the end, guys who ski it made decision to ski it, and that's also my point in all this writing here. You can't trust 100% someone else that they did perfect job and made terrain, that is impossible to be made 100% safe, 100% safe. You as skier, are the only one responsible for decision if you will drop in or say "well this doesn't seem safe enough for me" |
Yeah you're looking at it from a European perspective as would I. I might look at the hike to terrain and the nature of the fresh snow and conclude that it wasn't worth the risk(assuming that I wasn't discounting it on grounds of effort/efficiency when other fresh was available without hiking). But then culturally I'm a Euro so even in open inbounds terrain I'll often ski cut a slope with fresh snow etc where the locals are steaming in full tilt to every chute. face etc I'd wager that the primary thought in most of those caught minds was not "is this slope an avy risk?" but "can I score a fresh line?" It's not necessarily "looking for someone else to blame" to accept that culturally opening of inbounds terrain usually has a very specific meaning in the US given that many resorts have quite strong policies and laws re closures ( to the extent that many Euros would get into trouble for not accepting them i fthe usual "i accept the risk so I duck the rope" view prevailed.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| sweaman22 wrote: |
A quick google suggests Whistler hasn't suffered an inbounds avalanche in the last 10 years - there were some fatalities in 2009 but it would appear the victims were skiing in closed areas. I'm going to Whistler in a couple of weeks and I won't be taking beacon etc. The whole point of remaining inbounds is to be able to ski without having to constantly think about the avalanche risk. Ski patrol will be working on the assumption that no one is thinking about it because for the majority of skiers that's likely the case....
I was at Sunshine on Friday, the Avy was 4,3,3 trending to 4,4,3 and I was amazed at the number of people following the lemming line out of bounds.... |
Just be careful in the Gem Bowls as the convexities there mean it is basically impossible for patrol to cover every possible release point. I know a snowhead was partially buried in a avy there (though probably more than 10 years ago)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Slightly off-topic can of worms,.. how does generic UK travel insurance view skiing in the US outside of a marked piste (ie off-piste) but inbounds? Asking as I don't think they differentiate between continents on the policy and most often stipulate the need for a guide when off-piste. Shovel / probe aside this should be a carefully considered as much more likely to get hurt than buried and left with a hefty US medical bill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@Ozboy, don't take my word as the answer as I'm no expert. But I would think a common sense answer would be, all inbound terrain are "on piste" in north America.
Why? Because all terrain inbound do have "name" on them, clearly listed on maps. They're not itineraries, they're not "off piste". So what else can they be but "piste"?
I vaguely recall even seeing a few "piste" in Europe that have moguls on them, i.e. weren't bashed flat. Would those be considered piste or off-piste? That would be the most appropriate equivalence to north American inbound "off" piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Ozboy wrote: |
| Slightly off-topic can of worms,.. how does generic UK travel insurance view skiing in the US outside of a marked piste (ie off-piste) but inbounds? Asking as I don't think they differentiate between continents on the policy and most often stipulate the need for a guide when off-piste. Shovel / probe aside this should be a carefully considered as much more likely to get hurt than buried and left with a hefty US medical bill. |
I've never really had to test it. I think when I did have a tib plateau fracture I described it by phone to the insurance handler as "on an open clearly marked run and attanded by ski patrol" (well it was the Olympic Downhill course - the fact it was full of 4ft high moguls with a foot of powder not quite effectively covering them was irrelevant.
More seriously I think most wording refers to "marked runs" or indeed is explicit about N American inbounds terrain being covered. Which makes sense if you think about it - if patrol will send a sled (and remmeber insurance doesn't have to pay patrol rescue costs in N America) then it should be covered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| SnoodlesMcFlude wrote: |
| Wouldn't it be wise to have a shovel if you're tree skiing? Okay so the inbound terrain is controlled, but surely tree wells are still a risk? |
The issue with tree wells is usually getting stuck in them so you lack maneouvrability. In such circumstances extracting a shovel from a pack on your back is all but impossible and if you can do so you are probably in a position to climb out anyway. If your partner is in one or you happen upon a stranger you can probably pull them out or at least make an airway with your poles etc. |
This, a shovel will do you good if you are skiing with a partner who falls into a tree well. But if you are skiing alone, and fall into a tree well, a shovel is of no help. Honestly, the only thing that will help is having your wits about you and a whistle. When you go into a tree well, you got there because you hooked a tip or somehow crossed up your skis and you will 99.9% of the time go in head first. Now you are upside down, and probably with skis still on or maybe one ski still on. Snow is collapsing on you. It happens in an instant. So rule of thumb if you are skiing trees on a powder day, best to not do it alone. Last year, on the same day no less, two solo skiers died in tree wells on opposite sides of Mt. Bachelor. Crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Toadman wrote: |
| This, a shovel will do you good if you are skiing with a partner who falls into a tree well. But if you are skiing alone, and fall into a tree well, a shovel is of no help. |
Not sure that needs saying, similarly a shovel is unlikely to help if you're buried in an avalanche.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A completely personal perspective... if you’re not on the ‘piste’, take Avi kit, and know how to use it.... you really dont’ want to be in the position of not having it, or not knowing how it works, if you need it. For sure, less likely to need it in NA.... but if you’re buddy is stuck (Head first) in a tree well, what will you do...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pull him out!
By the leg or by whatever body part you can grab onto
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| SnoodlesMcFlude wrote: |
| Toadman wrote: |
| This, a shovel will do you good if you are skiing with a partner who falls into a tree well. But if you are skiing alone, and fall into a tree well, a shovel is of no help. |
Not sure that needs saying, similarly a shovel is unlikely to help if you're buried in an avalanche. |
https://eu.azcentral.com/story/news/weird/2014/12/19/skier-digs-head-out-of-snow-after-alaska-avalanche/20640835/
I cant find it now but theres also a youtube video of an avalanche victim buried who's quite deep and gets handed his own shovel to help free him
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Toadman wrote: |
... When you go into a tree well, you got there because you hooked a tip or somehow crossed up your skis and you will 99.9% of the time go in head first.
Now you are upside down, and probably with skis still on or maybe one ski still on. Snow is collapsing on you. It happens in an instant. ... |
That's not my experience in 30 seasons mostly spent in North American trees with lots of different people.
It's very rare for anyone to go in head first, much more common for people to fall in other ways.
Tree wells aren't like avalanches, there's no ongoing source of snow to do the "collapsing on you". A well is actually an air space.
I just think it's important to understand that unlike in a slide, with a tree well time is on your side and panic ought to be avoided (because the only source of new snow is your actions).
No doubt it happens, but I've never seen anyone who needed to be rescued from a well with a shovel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
