 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Interesting take on the effect of women being in the group and how it makes the men take greater risks-as a woman who skis almost exclusively with blokes I get that one-even when it's a middled aged(ish) woman (me!) with middle aged blokes and their 18-21 year old sons and friends!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Haggis_Trap, sorry dude you're wrong and a simple bit of googling will show you that both the Canadian and American system have individual qualifications that allow ski guiding on glaciated terrain. Being able to climb reasonably hard rock and ice has little to do with being able to navigate glacial terrain safely. These qualifications are probably not recognised outside the country in question and those with a reciprocal arrangement so you won't find them guiding in Europe. The real benefit of the UIAGM qualification is being qualified to work in all the member countries in several disciplines. Which is most likely also why you'll find the Americans with the UIAGM approved qualification guiding in Europe where the work is easier to find as the competition is lower as there are less specialist qualifications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
^ The 2 american guides that I know both work in Europe because there is much more year round work for them here.
There are surprisingly few american UIAGMs and in their words there "no culture of guiding" in north america.
Interestingly you are correct that the AMGA stand alone ski exam does allow them to work on glaciers but only in the USA. They only get international UIAGM status with all 3 strands (rock, ice, ski).
http://amga.com/ski-mountaineering-guide/
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Yeah, the same is true of the Ski Guiding courses in NZ and Canada as well (which are reciprocal). You'll find guides with these qualifications working internationally as well, the vast majority of the world isn't as sewn up by the UIAGM as they'd probably like you to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Haggis_Trap wrote: |
RE : Heuristic Traps.
To state the obvious more experience groups / people will spend more time off piste and also use their skills to look for more challenging routes. If you are going to stick your head in the lions mouth then be prepared that something might eventually happen. FWIW I think humans are bad at judging risk or assesing statistically probability. For example : if you ski a slope that is suspect and get "away with" then you tend to build a "false sense of security" over time. |
One of the most interesting accounts of this is Lee Lau's avalanche in the Whistler area reported at length on TGR. This was an area he skied all the time and his judgement was that they were just overly familiar with the area to fully risk assess on specifics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Haggis_Trap wrote: |
| ^ The 2 american guides ... {say there is} "no culture of guiding" in north america. |
I guess they don't know that they have a heli/ cat industry. Perhaps that's connected to the UIAGM's history and the politics around it. An analogy is the ESF and snowboarding - they just don't get it.
Guides? Got 'em coming out of our ears in North America. You'll not be riding a heli or a cat without a guide. There are plenty of more traditional ways to use guides too, for example Crosby and friends: http://altusmountainguides.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've only skimmed through the paper, but it seems to have something missing. How often were the hazard indicators present and no incident occurred; ie, what risk were they accepting? It might be that at least some of them were in fact making adequately rational risk assessments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
^ My understanding based on bar room conversation is that being a guide in North America simply doesnt command the same kudos / respect / history that it does in Europe. In Europe the local guides offices in Chamonix / Zermatt (etc) have been dragging clients up Mont Blanc or the Matterhorn for well over 100 hundred years. Many local guides are now 3rd or 4th generation locals whose grand fathers were mountain guides. Meanwhile in the USA the AMGA was only affiliated as recently as 1997.
There are surprisingly few american UIAGM guides - I dont know the numbers, but it certainly used to be less than 100 (*much* smaller than the UK association), and a very big % of those qualified operate in Europe. It is (apparently) a totaly different culture for both "clients" and "guides" in North America in terms of what is expected in terms of qualifications, skills, experience, opportunity, career path and wages available.
This is a good history here...
http://amga.com/harnessing-the-beast-amga-history/
Apologies for the off topic!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
It would be interesting if there was a analysis comparing amateur lead groups compared to professionally lead groups. In my experience professional guides (whatever the qualification) tend to be more cautious when leading clients compared to when they are out with their friends/peers. Also there is no information on number of avalanche free trips to give a real level of risk. A heli ski guide might be out 50 to 100 days in a season ( and double that per year) with clients while the amateur group leader could be out only one day in the season and make it into the stats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, of course North America has Heli and Cat guides but comparatively that is a tiny market charging large amounts per day compared to the approx €350 (or perhaps €400) per day for a group, of a simple stand-alone guide in Europe. Between 6 people that means that that much per person will get you 6 days, which is what we do. I can't afford Heli but I suppose Cat skiing might be just about doable (but why do it when I can ski European back-country from lifts and with a small amount of skinning).
The best guides book up very early. My regular guide (we do a week or 2 separate weeks with him every year) books out his full skiing season around May, when the previous one ends. In other seasons he teaches paragliding, guides rock-climbing and canyoning and does expeditions around the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Wow, a lot of interesting points of view and theories.
Going back to the original post, McCammon's study on Heuristics is excellent reading. However, like all things, you should consider ALL the contributing factors, not just the statistics. If you are fully aware of the the current avalanche risks, and the way a group operates effectively in avalanche terrain, then you should be able to make the best decisions, and hopefully not become a statistic yourself. For McCammon's article, and other interesting avalanche info, take a look at: http://tiny.cc/4mwz4w
The comments on guiding are interesting, and hiring a guide does not guarantee your safety any more than taking a ride with a licensed taxi means you won't be in a crash. But remember that guides are often skiing >100 days per season. Their exposure to risk is cumulatively massive. If a guide reckons he can reduce the chance of avalanche to 1/1000 then a statistician could argue that it is not just likely, but actually certain that he will be avalanched once every ten seasons. I'm not excusing any guide for reckless behaviour, but everything needs to be taken in perspective.
Hope you all have a safe season
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
OK, the view from someone that knows nothing on this subject.
So I decide I want to try off piste skiing. Like the group of teens, or school group, or group of competent friends etc. I recognise my lack of experience so I put my trust in someone. How do I pick that someone? Well I would probably visit the local TO or ski school and ask for a recommendation. I would then probably go with whoever I was pointed at. Is this right and in my best interests. How do I know the right person to lead - OK they might have a qualification as a tourist I might not even know if that is relevant without some homework. At the end of the day you have to trust someone, (that even starts with the TO who you ask to recommend someone), and if that someone isn't yourself, what criteria do you use? Even with all the qualifications under the sun do guides get blasee if they are always in the same location - I don't know - I would just have to hope that this wasn't my unlucky day. I get the kids a private instructor when we ski to take them off the main runways to do fun things, I trust that the instructor knows where it is safe to take them and where it isn't, but should I be doing more than this? I don't know how leaders are picked, but it seems to me that somewhere trust has to cut in. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Megamum, qualifications are basically the only objective criteria and provide a baseline for someones competence at the point at which they were assessed. Other than that meet the guide and discuss with them what you want to do and make sure your personalities and priorities fit. Using a guide is a means to see things you otherwise wouldn't and a risk reduction measure for traveling in the mountains not a guarantee of safety. Your word of mouth method is pretty much what everyone does and for the average skier is going to work absolutely fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Chatting to a guide in Tignes, and he commented that the only serious avalanche he'd been involved in had been when he was out on a day off with a group of fellow guides. He reckoned that because no one was responsible for the group they all just charged off and didn't assess the risks in the same way as they would if any one of them had felt responsible for the group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Snowgirl99, reassuring they want to keep us safe. As others pointed out though, many guides have been involved in avalanches. What I don't know if there is information on is whether these groups or clients were expressly looking for more adventurous / risky experiences, or whether the quides were genuinely trying to avoid any sign of trouble but just got caught out. I wonder what it must be like for guides when a group reports for an off-piste day, which may have been booked weeks in advance, but risk is 4/5, or 3/5 affecting all aspects. I think many clients just expect a guide to have a magic intuition that will keep them safe and will expect powder experience on risky days. Are there some days when guides are damn nervous heading out and thanking their lucky stars when they come back safely? Personally, if a guide was nervous in the morning, I would prefer he cancelled or just took us down pistes as I wouldn't accept that level of risk, but I would probably never pipe up in that situation and just keep telling myself "he knows what he's doing/ where he's taking us"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
As per my previous post, I don't like riding in scenarios where the guides' pay is related to what's ridden. There are current commercial models where it works that way.
When riding mellow trees rather than steeps because the snowpack is dangerous people should be delighted at what is a display of sane risk management behaviour. You're more likely to hear people complain that they can't ride what they want. That's the source of the tension.
I think the fundamental challenge is the particular characteristic of this type of risk. If you close your eyes and walk across a motorway at night wearing dark clothes you probably won't manage one crossing before you're done. You can ride risky terrain in poor snow conditions and get away with it more often than not. The risk is there, but predicting it is not a precise science, so you have to err on the side of caution. The good news is that you can significantly reduce (but not eliminate) your risk by simply (for example) avoiding slopes which are obviously more dangerous. Oops, probably preaching to the converted.
I think all this has to be kept in perspective. Statistically I suspect driving through France is riskier than guided off-piste in French resorts (I do not have the evidence for that).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Megamum, If you are interested there are loads of ways to learn more yourself about assessing the risks of skiing off piste. One of the most useful things I have found is being able to estimate the steepness of a slope in regards to the relative risk of it sliding. Basically a lot of the slopes I like skiing are pretty shallow when it comes to risk of avalanche, what I consider to be steepish is when it is starting to get more dangerous and 40 degrees is probably at the upper limits of my comfort zone and even then I would only be happy to ski that steeply for a short while, i.e a steep run in to a mellower slope. When there's tons of fresh snow or the temperature is changing a lot at the end of the season I would stay off slopes that are steep to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 wrote: |
| I think all this has to be kept in perspective. Statistically I suspect driving through France is riskier than guided off-piste in French resorts (I do not have the evidence for that). |
+1. I would say the same (more even) for Spain, though that says more about my opinion on typical Spanish motorway driving technique than anything else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@Arno, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hah, that's awesome. We met another party on Saturday and I had to help one get into his Dynafits at the summit of the mountain. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure Idris taught me how to get out of my Dynafits by the Bochard gondola after I'd just skied a run with him 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
