 Poster: A snowHead
|
@Sub_Zero_G, exactly the example I was about to make (and I'm sure I've seen such signs elsewhere as well).
re skiing closed runs:
I agree with clarky999 that it's important to know why a piste is closed. I was once with a instructor (and ski school director) in ValD who took us down the Face while it was closed. As we passed the sign he turned to us and said that in France there is no distinction between a closed run and off-piste provided the run has never been open that season. The banner there was contradicting the implication that it was a prepared piste. So we were skiing it as if it were off-piste - with all the considerations/precautions that implies - and based on his knowledge of its condition at the time. In this case the problem was poor snow cover - 80% of the run was fine, but the bottom 20% was such thin snow that we were crunching our bases as we got down. (I've also several times got onto lower parts of closed runs while skiing off-piste - and there has of course been no sign halfway down the piste that you are now joining a closed piste)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| GrahamN wrote: |
| As we passed the sign he turned to us and said that in France there is no distinction between a closed run and off-piste provided the run has never been open that season. The banner there was contradicting the implication that it was a prepared piste. |
That's a good point. Last season, in December, I skied what I knew to be red piste in Val Thorens after some fresh snow, except there was nothing to indicate it was a piste, no pole markers or anything. The pisteurs had not done any work on that run at all that early in the season. The following day the piste poles were in place but the run had not been prepared in any other way, certainly hadn't been bashed. But because the piste poles were in place there was a net barrier at the top saying piste closed. Other than that it was in exactly the same condition (other than some extra tracks down it compared to when I skied it the previous day).
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
A casual visitor cannot hope to know the history of a specific "run" (probably a better term than piste in this context) in a season. And indeed a run which has never been opened might in fact have been pisted periodically if only to consolidate the base. So I see no real harm in a supplemental sign indicating the reason for closure - essentially this might be poor snow cover, avalanche risk (to include ongoing control work) or risky conditions in the event of a fall (e.g. hard refreeze on a steep gradient = long uncontrolled slide risk). If there is any doubt call it avy risk.
Some places in the US will put up patrol augmented signs in such an event such as "If you fall you will fall all the way" or "We really mean experts only in these conditions" or "X people this season have enjoyed an unplanned night in the cold as a result of entering this area". They also have the helpful option of actually being able to take action e.g. I saw a sign to enforce a particular closure saying "Minimum 30 day pass suspension for entering this closure" as a deterrent to poachers (it was an area that was very rocky and potentially some small chutes that might flush). But even in the US it doesn't mean that "custom & practice" doesn't develop alternately see the sad case of Taft Conlin at Vail for some of the arguments that closed doesn't always mean closed and therefore a resort might be liable (IMV an understandable but ultimately fallacious grasp at some comfort by grief stricken parents)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I don't know about "Les Contamines", but most places I ride (including Europe) the pistes are often closed in the mornings after a storm until the avalanche control is done. They don't want you there whilst they're blasting. In this case "closed" means: if we don't manage to blow you up, we probably get you in the slides we're causing.
North American resort safety managers avoid having an otherwise usable piste closed by preventing people riding areas where avalanches could be started. They stop you riding closed areas so they can open other areas. It's a really good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
most places I ride (including Europe) the pistes are often closed in the mornings after a storm until the avalanche control is done. They don't want you there whilst they're blasting. In this case "closed" means: if we don't manage to blow you up, we probably get you in the slides we're causing.
|
Anywhere I know well (Cham, M'rosa, PdS, GM) the lifts to access those closed areas won't open until it's safe.
After a heavy storm e.g. this week there was hardly anything open in Chamonix higher up anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Sub_Zero_G wrote: |
| clarky999 wrote: |
| miranda wrote: |
| But I guess they didn't put up specific signs saying "closed due to lack of snow" or "closed due to avalanche risk" or "closed to preserve the snow for the school holidays" etc. I wonder if that would make matters better or worse? |
I doubt they did, and I've never seen signs saying WHY a piste closed. But they really should do it, as it makes a LOT of difference. |
I've seen very specific signs used in Chamonix, saying "closed due to thin snow" and "closed due to avalanche risk." They even put up netted signs about avalanche risk for entries to off piste lines where the terrain is above pistes, this pic from last season is a good example:
 |
Definitely saw this a lot in 3Vs last week, sometimes at a spot where I presume they anticipated there was a high degree of likelihood that people would use a lift to get off piste, other times over pistes
While I agree in principle with the points made re info on closed pistes I'm minded that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing - people who think they know what they're at, but don't, may make the decision to ski it anyway and for the wrong reasons
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dauphine Libere now saying that the group had already ski-ed the closed piste the day before....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
people who think they know what they're at, but don't, may make the decision to ski it anyway and for the wrong reasons
|
you'd have to be a bit of an idiot to think a piste is closed for low snow cover after a dump
| Quote: |
don't know about "Les Contamines", but most places I ride (including Europe) the pistes are often closed in the mornings after a storm until the avalanche control is done
|
Phil. I'm referring to two resort runs which wind their way through a forest where they never blast and is not overhung by any slopes (it's the end of a spur).
Obviously they close some runs for avalanche risk or avy control reasons. Indeed one lift that opens up a big off-piste but avalanche prone area is closed about half the time as are all the pistes around it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| caughtanedge wrote: |
| Dauphine Libere now saying that the group had already ski-ed the closed piste the day before.... |
Not looking overly good for the teacher - though I appreciate different expectations of duty of care may be in place and some allowance made for headstrong 16 year olds. Whatever I suspect the prosecutor has a partially political decision to make which might make it easier to pin blame on a "Romanian triggerman".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| caughtanedge wrote: |
| Dauphine Libere now saying that the group had already ski-ed the closed piste the day before.... |
Also that the run was closed due to poor snow cover.
Also that the teacher in charge was "psychologically fragile" and had spent several weeks in a psychatric institution being treated for depression, being discharged last November.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Weathercam wrote: |
| rob@rar wrote: |
| ......I'm sure some of the "powder fever" that I saw all afternoon in Les Arcs was replicated across other resorts.... |
Trouble is it's so easy to get caught up in the "fever" and I'm sure many of us have been guilty of that when maybe we were less aware of the dangers, or were young and invincible.
If one particular chair had been open today, and not closed due to technical issues, there would have been powder hounds a plenty, many with no idea or gear, or all the gear and no idea.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are immediate decisions with a view to closing lifts that enable people to venture into dangerous terrain, but where do you draw the line? |
Yep, I bet we've all skied things we shouldn't have done. Mind you, it's different if there are teachers involved. OK to take a risk for yourself. Poor kids, poor parents. Poor teachers as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting that the guy who went into Tignes Lac was an Evo2 employee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
I'll admit to riding a closed red (Signal Bis, AdH) several times last week - in fact there were often more people skiing the closed piste than the open one, often in full view of the Patrol/lift ops. Not challenged on it - nobody was. Plenty of other "Closed" signs being ducked elsewhere.
However, I did see where a small release had happened at another location on the mountain which had been caused by a skier. You could see what had happened, and that it had happened recently too, just above the Chamois red coming down from 2700 station, Two tracks, just off the piste, above the track, one had a lower line and came out the other side before the slip, one higher had caused it to trigger. The slump was piled up at the side of the piste, hadn't encroached more than a few feet, but still, shows how unstable the pack can be even is relatively innocuous areas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
some are saying that a number of kids had skied of in front of the teacher so the teacher followed....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| jedster wrote: |
| Quote: |
people who think they know what they're at, but don't, may make the decision to ski it anyway and for the wrong reasons
|
you'd have to be a bit of an idiot to think a piste is closed for low snow cover after a dump
|
Agree. But if we think the rule should be we should decide when we can ski a closed piste then people might legitimately have decided to ski it because it hadn't opened all season, and probably wasn't opened because they hadn't pisted it yet, whereas in this instance it appears the risk was actually from above. Your average skier won't know this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
I will continue to do as i always have, if it says closed, it's closed. i don't care why it's closed but someone has decided it should be closed so stay off it. if everyone acknowledged this we would not be having the discussion and the two pupils and the ukrainian man would still be with us. a needless waste of life
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Pistes closed in EK today with clear warnings of avalanche danger. Masses of people ducking the ropes and in one case - access to the Face, people seemed to have mown down the ropes and were simply skiing over them
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Why? This is ridiculous!! They have to sort this out or it will keep happening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| poppyb wrote: |
| Why? This is ridiculous!! They have to sort this out or it will keep happening. |
Because France isn't a police state. Much like you can't stop people driving their car into a wall if they choose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A testimony from a former student of the teacher in the paper today makes me feel really sorry for him and - if true - makes me hope that the inquest finds that he shouldn't have been put in the position of having control over teenagers on the mountain rather than finding him criminally liable. Think kids chucking things at him and laughing at him and him just taking it and basically exploiting his "psychological fragility" until he had a breakdown as mentioned by UANN earlier in the thread. That is NOT by an means trying to say, or even imply, that the teenagers were responsible for themselves, but more that it's really not clear that he should have been put in the position he was. Until the inquest is over, it's all speculation of course. But I can't but help feel sorry for everyone involved in this tragedy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+mikeelsa I agree. It'll be closed for a good reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| SkiPresto wrote: |
| +mikeelsa I agree. It'll be closed for a good reason. |
Sometimes pistes are closed because the ski area wants to save snow for holiday makers. That's still a good, commercial reason but might rankle with skiers who have just sprung 40 euros for a lift pass. As we've seen earlier, guided groups were skiing this run. Casual observers won't know they were guided groups and might think the run is acceptable to ski.
In the case of this piste the pisteurs had done avalanche control work and had no results (no slides).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree it's terrible for those concerned but what's the actual risk here in terms of probability? ive seen hundreds of people (if not thousands of tracks) in Val a Thorens and surrounding valleys this week in avi 4/5 and to my knowledge no deaths or injuries. Multiple that out across the ski areas and are we talking about a very low probability of an event such as this, tragic though it may be.
If it weren't people under 18 this thread would be 2 pages max.... I also am not convinced that it's an age thing either in terms of knowing about risk. The majority of people above 18 who are not parents, myself included (I.e. Only looking after themselves) have no idea about true mountain safety...
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@Levi215, you touch on a fairly crucial element of this discussion.
All of the "modern" infrastructure of pistes, pisteurs, avvy control, etc. exists more or less so that anyone whatsoever can jump on a pair of skis with a lift pass, and as long as they stick to the rules can have a reasonable expectation of a safe experience without once having to consider that they are otherwise in a more or less entirely inhospitable and dangerous environment.
It's easy to forget.
Mountains are not amusement parks, no matter how hard the managing companies would like you to think so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
@Levi215, you touch on a fairly crucial element of this discussion.
All of the "modern" infrastructure of pistes, pisteurs, avvy control, etc. exists more or less so that anyone whatsoever can jump on a pair of skis with a lift pass, and as long as they stick to the rules can have a reasonable expectation of a safe experience without once having to consider that they are otherwise in a more or less entirely inhospitable and dangerous environment.
It's easy to forget.
Mountains are not amusement parks, no matter how hard the managing companies would like you to think so. |
Hmmm... the "infrastructure" turns a small sector of the mountain into an amusement park, which can be enjoyed safely without too much training. Step outside that well-defined boundary, the inhospitable mountain swallows people up routinely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@abc, but in Europe, that well defined boundary isn't so well understood to be well defined... The US manages this much better, in some respects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Levi215 wrote: |
I agree it's terrible for those concerned but what's the actual risk here in terms of probability? ive seen hundreds of people (if not thousands of tracks) in Val a Thorens and surrounding valleys this week in avi 4/5 and to my knowledge no deaths or injuries. Multiple that out across the ski areas and are we talking about a very low probability of an event such as this, tragic though it may be.
If it weren't people under 18 this thread would be 2 pages max.... I also am not convinced that it's an age thing either in terms of knowing about risk. The majority of people above 18 who are not parents, myself included (I.e. Only looking after themselves) have no idea about true mountain safety... |
The risks are probably higher than you imagine. Deaths are commonplace but just normally barely reported. I can't remember the exact number but there are often around 100 people killed in avalanches each year in the Alps. In Val Thorens last year I remember someone killed around the back of Boismint, in Val Thorens as you mention, and it barely getting a report.
This case is so tragic and it is good that it is reported and highlights the risks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
I had a look at the avalanche site today. The crown is actually very high up on skiers left above the main body of the run, the slide slid down the full width of the run on its lower section before terminating in a terrain trap at the bottom. Anyone on anywhere but the very top of the run would have been taken out so victims could have been carried a couple of hundred metres at least potentially.
A (very generous) point would be that only the entrance to the run is fenced off. If cutting down from one of the access runs above it would be very easy to end up on the run without realising it was closed.
Pistes are closed for all reasons; Incomplete, exposed rocks, piste basher (or other machinery) operating, extremely icy, high avalanche risk, event in progress, lift not operating, or otherwise difficult conditions to name a few. If its closed its closed for a good reason. If you proceed beyond a closed sign you need to be prepared to take care of yourself as if you were skiing on an a different mountain. Thats my view.
| Quote: |
I agree it's terrible for those concerned but what's the actual risk here in terms of probability? ive seen hundreds of people (if not thousands of tracks) in Val a Thorens and surrounding valleys this week in avi 4/5 and to my knowledge no deaths or injuries. Multiple that out across the ski areas and are we talking about a very low probability of an event such as this, tragic though it may be.
If it weren't people under 18 this thread would be 2 pages max.... I also am not convinced that it's an age thing either in terms of knowing about risk. The majority of people above 18 who are not parents, myself included (I.e. Only looking after themselves) have no idea about true mountain safety...
|
It varies season to season. I'd like to think that the reason these events are so rare is that Ski Patrol do an excellent job both in terms of setting of controlled avalanches and assessing the risk and feeding the information on. And most folk understand to play safe under such high risk conditions.
IMO and in the eyes of the law anyone leading or instructing a group in the mountains regardless of on or off piste or age takes responsibility for everyone in the groups safety. IIRC if the children are under 16 then they cannot be held responsible (in this context) by law. If you are not happy with the responsibility you shouldn't put yourself in that situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| davidof wrote: |
| SkiPresto wrote: |
| +mikeelsa I agree. It'll be closed for a good reason. |
Sometimes pistes are closed because the ski area wants to save snow for holiday makers. That's still a good, commercial reason but might rankle with skiers who have just sprung 40 euros for a lift pass. As we've seen earlier, guided groups were skiing this run. Casual observers won't know they were guided groups and might think the run is acceptable to ski.
In the case of this piste the pisteurs had done avalanche control work and had no results (no slides). |
Nail on head..................
Think in this thread there are obviously various schools of thought on this tragedy.
But as someone posted in the early pages what's the difference between off piste and a closed run?
When you ski La Grave there are no pistes, no security, no blasting, you ski nature. And time and time again you see families merrily skiing the main runs (many without kit) which always makes me chuckle in a weird way, almost in admiration, but maybe they've been doing it from father to son, siblings etc etc - a classic heuristic trap?
Today I was skiing in the Trois Vallees with some very exhuberant 18-20yr olds who just could not "get" why the top lifts were shut, even though I went to great lengths (though obvioulsy failed) to explain the reasoning behind the decison.
And jeeeesss did I see some stuff going on today 
One run off the side of Chanrossa only had a few tracks on it when we went up, and could have been deemed to be a tad sketchy, but I decided against it as people I was with were too inexperienced and then an hour later it was skied out!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| cammyammy wrote: |
| IIRC if the children are under 16 then they cannot be held responsible (in this context) by law. |
Well I don't know about the ages of the survivors, but according to the official statement as relayed here by Davidof:
| Quote: |
| the two students were 16 years old, one had 17th birthday next week |
I don't think anyone has said these teenagers were responsible in any context, have they 
| Quote: |
| If you are not happy with the responsibility you shouldn't put yourself in that situation |
and it would be better and easier if life were that black and white. Unfortunately, there seems to be a big question mark over the matter of whether the teacher was in a fit state to be put in a position of responsibility of these teenagers on the mountain, which is why "L'enquête devra déterminer l'état psychiatrique du professeur et sa capacité à encadrer un groupe"
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
I know nothing of the circumstances of this awful accident but I do know that some kids take no notice of instructions or orders from teachers. I also know that my kids at 16 sometimes did things I'd told them not to do, including skiing closed pistes. people have been skiing all sorts of daft stuff in the last couple of days. The ones who got away with it were equally culpable/stupid. Just luckier. We don't yet know what happened in Deux Alpes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Perhaps we should wait until all the facts are known before rushing to judgement on the teacher
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| emwmarine wrote: |
The risks are probably higher than you imagine. Deaths are commonplace but just normally barely reported. I can't remember the exact number but there are often around 100 people killed in avalanches each year in the Alps. In Val Thorens last year I remember someone killed around the back of Boismint, in Val Thorens as you mention, and it barely getting a report. |
I read (I think in SteveAngus' Blog about Bourg St Mourice expecting 18,000 cars one weekend? If there are 100 deaths a year with that many visitors to a single valley the risk is there with high consequence but the probability has got to be minuscule? It's poor judgement no doubt, but combined with terrible fortune.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Rabbie wrote: |
| Perhaps we should wait until all the facts are known before rushing to judgement on the teacher |
Most sensible comment on this thread...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Levi215, in 2013 there were 1,713 road deaths in the UK.
Doesn't stop anyone driving round to Tesco's for a pint of milk does it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, The guy who went into the lake in Tignes Le Lac was sacked in Tignes last year by his manager for reckless behaviour off piste. However, there is anecdotal evidence that he has been seen in La Ros in the same uniform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
I will continue to do as i always have, if it says closed, it's closed. i don't care why it's closed but someone has decided it should be closed so stay off it. if everyone acknowledged this we would not be having the discussion and the two pupils and the ukrainian man would still be with us. a needless waste of life
|
+1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Levi215 wrote: |
| emwmarine wrote: |
The risks are probably higher than you imagine. Deaths are commonplace but just normally barely reported. I can't remember the exact number but there are often around 100 people killed in avalanches each year in the Alps. In Val Thorens last year I remember someone killed around the back of Boismint, in Val Thorens as you mention, and it barely getting a report. |
I read (I think in SteveAngus' Blog about Bourg St Mourice expecting 18,000 cars one weekend? If there are 100 deaths a year with that many visitors to a single valley the risk is there with high consequence but the probability has got to be minuscule? It's poor judgement no doubt, but combined with terrible fortune. |
Obviously written by a stats expert!
Except you aren't measuring the number of people skiing closed black runs loaded with first cover new
snow on a thin icy base with extremely poor adhesion.
The statistical population required to trigger an avalanche is often 1.
Teachers leading groups: If you don't take your group of 10 kids on closed black runs, there is a 0% chance of being avalanched on one.
I'm not shocked that people got avalanched on such a slope. What does shock me is some of the "ah but" comments on this forum excusing such activity and decision making.
Even if this group was as some say competent skiers, they should have been wearing full avi gear and the group was far too big.
The group should have been led by several fully qualified ski instructors, and full training should have been carried out well in advance. However in this case, it was a school holiday, not a mountain skills course.
I hope they throw the book at all of those responsible, and that is the school management. Not just this teacher.
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Sat 16-01-16 19:21; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
