 Poster: A snowHead
|
It is possibly a good idea to split the avalanche discussion out of the incident report of the unfortunate St Gevais slide as it doesn't really concern the victims and their family.
The recent half a meter of fresh snow has brought a crop of incidents, some very serious.
https://pistehors.com/L3w_64wB1g7SdbHcG-mN/series-of-avalanches-in-the-french-alps
All incidents at risk 3 following fresh snow.
3 skiing alone AFAIKS, 1 dead due to the very long delay in the alert being given and an off piste skier very lucky to have been spotted by pisteurs given the low cloud and poor visibility (although he was seriously injured).
Another group were glade skiing, picture below. The first skier was waiting to the side of the line being skied by the second when the second triggered a slab that strained him through trees. The first and third were able to rescue him but game over for this season.
A lone ski tourer above Sauze was only found 24 hours after being buried by an avalanche, obviously the delay was fatal. His skis were spotted on the surface of the slide. A very strong skier and trail runner and well known locally due to his activity on social media.
Two Italian snowshoers were killed by an avalanche at 2,200 metres in the Val Formazza on the Swiss border. Bodies swept into a lake. Dog recovery. Difficult rescue conditions.
There were also ski tourers lost in the poor visibility on Sunday after their telephone which they were using to navigate failed in the cold. Another injured due to a fall.
One take-out is that you need to be very careful skiing in poor visibility. Personally I'd stay at or near the tree line and remember the rescue services may not be able to reach you easily if 1) you don't know where you are and 2) they can't fly to the scene. If you have an accident the delay can be significant as was the case with the seriously injured Val Thorens skier who had to be taken by stretcher to Orelle for transfer to hospital.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Thanks @davidof.
Sobering stuff & also very timely with the new dumps arriving.
I'm a relatively experienced powder skier & somewhat experienced ski mountaineer at this stage, and tbh the more I know & the more I've skied & spent time in the mountains, the more cautious I've become, while still going out each day & in each area we deem safe (research it, talk to lifties & applying the common sense (take a breath) check) to fully enjoy the mountains where we are comfortable.
As well as pistehors.com, e.g. https://pistehors.com/news/forums/viewthread/453/
There was a book and avalanche risk awareness /recognition book & on line quiz from https://www.glenmorelodge.org.uk/be-avalanche-aware/ which were really useful resources.
One trend of some stats on avalanches struck me when researching these was
- nearly 80% of skier affecting avalanches occur on ava risk level 3 & above days, and further,
-nearly 80% of avalanches occur on slopes between 33 & 43 degrees. (With really critical risk between 35 & 40 degrees) see pistehors.com discussion above
- Also pay attention to slope orientation which is a key determinant of risk on any day. (Due to recent wind, snow pack formation,etc,etc,etc)
- And current visibility & the weather forecast are 2 fundamental & vital elements of safety
So skiing selectively, smart route choosing & skiing in a sensible small group in good viz with a favorable forecast can mitigate risk massively, which allows you to fully concentrate on enjoying the mountain within these mitigated limits imho.
But no approach is fool proof, there is always an element of risk involved & human group dynamics are nearly the most essential elements of safety in any group I've been privileged to be part of tbh.
Read the pistehors discussion above for reference, it's top class savy advice from sage ski mountaineers imho.Thanks again @davidof
Ski safely people!!
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Tue 9-01-24 13:21; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Your post reminds me of a recent incident in Pitztal, where a ski tourer was (presumed) caught in an avalanche, but they were apparently alone and without a beacon – the search was triggered by another tourer who saw no tracks leaving the avalanche debris area, but could not find a signal. Some info here: https://avalanche.report/blog/at-07-en/9173
The recovery search was called off twice due to conditions. I have not heard anything further, but assume it concluded as expected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@davidof, thanks
I think poor visibility doesn’t get talked about enough as a factor. It affects lots of things - your ability to see natural activity and objective hazards, judge steepness etc etc as well as more obvious factors such as finding your way
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Arno wrote: |
@davidof, thanks
I think poor visibility doesn’t get talked about enough as a factor. It affects lots of things - your ability to see natural ac.tivity and objective hazards, judge steepness etc etc as well as more obvious factors such as finding your way |
Yes good point.
I went out for an easy tour on low angled terrain under blue skies. The avalanche risk was 3 and there were a bunch of natural releases on steeper ground. Half way round the door it got cloudy, the wind got up and suddenly visibility was poor. We made a mistake with our descent route (not using GPS and the wind deterred me from getting the map out). Fortunately I recognised that the descent was steepening more than I expected and I got the fear. We climbed back out and descended the right way. The climb was made more difficult because we had chucked the skins in our bags thinking we wouldn't need them again and they froze up and stopped sticking.
There were an absolute laundry list of lessons learned that day. Fortunately at minimal cost.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Big chapeau to @davidof, for opening this new thread on the general avalanche debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Arno,
| Quote: |
@davidof, thanks
I think poor visibility doesn’t get talked about enough as a factor. It affects lots of things - your ability to see natural activity and objective hazards, judge steepness etc etc as well as more obvious factors such as finding your way
|
Absolutely. I relate this to my winter mountaineering days. With a friend I walked a round of a couple of Munros in terrible vis, continuous heavy snow and spindrift. By compass bearings and pace counting we got to the final summit. On the descent I resorted to the throwing snowballs trick to ascertain if there was actually ground six feet in front vis was that bad. At one point the snowball just disappeared, I crept to the edge, throwing more snowballs, the ground definitely stopped, just disappearing whiteness beyond. We traversed the slope and found a safe way down, but to this day I don't know if the drop was 4feet, 40 feet, or two hundred!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Great thread. It's quite amazing the difference visibility makes. Our group has turned back on a couple of occasions and felt perhaps over cautious in doing so. Discussing the possible outcomes afterwards and clarifying why we did what we did, we then felt justified in our decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| alj wrote: |
| Great thread. It's quite amazing the difference visibility makes. Our group has turned back on a couple of occasions and felt perhaps over cautious in doing so. Discussing the possible outcomes afterwards and clarifying why we did what we did, we then felt justified in our decisions. |
turn backs are always good decisions. The psychological pressure is always to go on. If you've overcome that you've done it for a reason. I'd celebrate that and not worry about whether you'd have been OK if you pushed on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If in doubt, dack out
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I have a great deal of stuff churning in my mind just at the present so share some of my burden.......
Only last week I listened to Julian Griffith's chat regarding his horrible ordeal of losing two instructors. I did a week with Julian many years ago and I believe him to be a very people focussed person. It is difficult to comprehend how he must have felt and indeed still feels about the ordeal.
I ski regularly with a young Grindelwald instructor who recalled events last April when the snow really arrived in the region.
A gang of 12 - 14 youngish instructors went out for their end of term bash.
The White Hare is a popular off-piste bank and naturally with great snow on the hill that was where they were skiing.
Amongst a dozen ski instructors there was 2 yes two transceivers! Logic dictates that there was only 2 shovels and 2 probes.
Pleased to report my young friend was one of the transceiver wearers!
If our up and coming young professionals are this badly informed, aware ,blasé, reckless the future looks bleak.
My thinking is as follows, client asks "instructor" for advice on local off-piste, any restrictions, any don't go days.
Hell no, no problem skiing up there any day of the week, no not necessary to have gear....I don't bother!
If I am off course Snowheads then shoot me down, most don't need that invitation! As I said in the top paragraph there is a lot churning in my mind......there is more but this will suffice for now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Whenever I think of heading into a risky zone, I think of how Ed Viesturs got to within 300 feet of the summit of Mt Everest and, after all that effort, still had the discipline to turn around and head down due to deteriorating conditions. Like Ed, we must prioritize returning home, not tracks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Davidof will have plenty of time to contribute as he won't be skiing again for ages.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Thanks for that. A bit long winded but still a worthwhile listen. I recognize a lot of the behavior he describes. Young people coming out for seasons, getting carried away with the powder frenzy etc etc. It’s not just British and Swedish seasonaires though. There are experienced locals who also take big risks. And the places you find people with no kit or experience makes the mind boggle. I think you’ve got to keep in mind what it must be like for him having to go through this with the parents of a 23 year old who’s just been killed in an avalanche. His message AIUI is to listen to people with experience, go with a guide, educate yourself, and be sensible. All good advice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@BobinCH, avalanche incidents largely involve locals who ski a huge amount. There are tourists involved but they tend to be less adventurous than the locals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| davidof wrote: |
| @BobinCH, avalanche incidents largely involve locals who ski a huge amount. There are tourists involved but they tend to be less adventurous than the locals. |
For sure. And would not question your avi savvy noting how much research you have done. But in Verbier, he had 2 seasonaire instructors die and the year before it was the British chef from Chez Dany. So he is trying to educate the young, bold seasonaires which is a worthwhile effort IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
@BobinCH, education is always worthwhile and losing two staff is very traumatic. I wouldn't want people to get the impression that season workers are a particular problem but obviously anyone in resort can ski a lot and hit the new snow when it is there.
Why do I mention this? Just because I've heard so many people (not snowheads but French locals) claim over the years that it is Brits or Swedes or Parisians or young inexperienced freeriders who are the principal victims of avalanches when the reality is that it is frequently people who ski a lot in a season who are using their knowledge to push things to the limit and beyond in a random environment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| davidof wrote: |
@BobinCH, education is always worthwhile and losing two staff is very traumatic. I wouldn't want people to get the impression that season workers are a particular problem but obviously anyone in resort can ski a lot and hit the new snow when it is there.
Why do I mention this? Just because I've heard so many people (not snowheads but French locals) claim over the years that it is Brits or Swedes or Parisians or young inexperienced freeriders who are the principal victims of avalanches when the reality is that it is frequently people who ski a lot in a season who are using their knowledge to push things to the limit and beyond in a random environment. |
Yes but the people doing that know what they are doing and that they are pushing boundaries. And he has no influence over them.
The young seasonaires that Julian Griffiths is targeting are kids he knows and employs, are often naive, and he’s seen that naivety lead to their deaths. He acknowledges that he is no expert but encourages people to seek expert advice before going off piste. It’s a sensible message and IMO we should applaud him for it rather than pick holes in the details
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Listened to it today. Didn't find them overly negative. Definitely didn't put me off off piste. Could have been a little shorter.
I think there is some truth in the stereotypes they talk about. Some of the young Scandis in particular seem happy to take what I would consider unacceptable risks. Perhaps they just have a different risk tolerance, in which case fair enough, but I suspect many are simply not educated enough. For example the "best snow is on level 4 days" was particularly hard to listen to.
As with most other avy deaths it seems pretty avoidable. Skiing one at a time would at least have given them a chance. But really, going off piste on a risk 4 day is something I'm sure most of us would avoid (although it sounds like where they actually got caught may have been at 3).
Of course it's worth having the actual experience and reality of death bought up. If it just makes some people take it a little more seriously that can only be a good thing. However, it's still easy to say "won't be me" and point to the mistakes they made that we like to think we wouldn't in similar circumstances. By far the most terrifying thing that really bought it home the reality to me was the gorpo vid of the guy who was buried and dug out. Even if you are not particularly afraid of death, you don't want to go out like that. Very harrowing, to the point one of the guys I know never went back country skiing again.
A few other thoughts:
-Police report seems excellent. Shame in these cases they are not made publicly available. I understand the need for some privacy and there are absolutely some things we don't need/want to know. But as a learning tool it seems like it could be very instructional.
-im also the kind of person that hates seeing bad practices glorified in films. Not skiing one at a time is a particular bug bear. However, it does look incredibly cool someone skiing away/outrunning an avalanche, it's almost an epitomy of human overcoming the mountain. If I was a movie editor that would definitely be the money shot. I'm not sure how you change that.
-i thought the criticism of the freeride world tour was a bit unfair. They actually do talk about how the slope is prepared and assessed, and it being compulsory for riders to carry avalanche safety equipment. Also a bit unfair to tarnish ski media as a whole of not doing anything. There a things like the 50 project that go into a lot of detail about this kind of stuff. It's there if you want it.
-i think it's absolutely a good thing what they are doing with the talks. The problem is attracting the people that actually need to the talk. The last time I went to an avalanche talk the speakers first question was "raise your hand if you have already done AST1" (the most basic avy training course in Canada which is where the talk was being done). To which around 90% of the room raised their hand. Needless to say the bunch of Aussie gap year kids living in the same hostel as me who had been going out of bounds with no gear and no idea would have benefited much more. Of course they didn't go, because when you don't know anything you don't realise the dangers you are potentially putting yourself in.
Not related to the podcast. An old uni friend has been on his yearly ski trip this week, other than this he spends no time in the mountains. Instagram story is of him hiking up from the top of a lift to a peak and dropping into a bowl. Very much off piste and avalanche terrain. No avy equipment and solo. Risk 3 day. Clearly not "best practice", but I expect very much the norm. What can you expect, he simply doesn't know there is a risk, I doubt avalanche has even crossed his mind as a possibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| BobinCH wrote: |
| t’s a sensible message and IMO we should applaud him for it rather than pick holes in the details |
How you get to "picking holes in the details" from what I said I don't know. I was just commenting the reckless seasonaire stereotype is overdone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to snow falling down mountains at inconvenient moments. This next weather cycle could cause havoc. We had (Jungfrau region) very powerful wind yesterday with a little new snow.
Plenty of evidence, this morning, of naturally released thin wind slab. Significant snowfall might well lead to some major 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.
|
|
Nice bit of footage @kitenski, this has to be a classic example of something appearing stable but in actual fact being very very fragile.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Anyone see this one from a couple days ago?
Nick Burks, 37, an avalanche forecaster and experienced backcountry skier, was killed while skiing in the Elkhorn Mountains in northeastern Oregon last week, the authorities said.
Gift link to article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/oregon-avalanche-forecaster-killed.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ck0.14-M.L0Yl6P6xmheO&smid=url-share
As much as I’m intrigued by the idea of getting into back country skiing, every time I read a news report about someone who is an expert in back country skiing dying while doing it I get discouraged. I don’t mind risk taking - I’ve been riding motorcycles on and off road as well as racing for 50 years. The thing I don’t like is that even if you do everything right you can still get got, and it seems to happen at a much higher rate than it does on motorcycles.
One answer would be to simply ratchet down how close the edge you’re willing to push things when skiing in the back country. I suppose I could do that, but geez I’d get bored, I fear. I know myself well enough to know that I like to push myself - it’s where the learning comes from. Need to keep thinking about this as I’m getting truly disillusioned with skiing otherwise. Groomers are starting to bore me. Dying doesn’t seem like all that much fun. I love skiing. What to do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Anyone see this one from a couple days ago?
Nick Burks, 37, an avalanche forecaster and experienced backcountry skier, was killed while skiing in the Elkhorn Mountains in northeastern Oregon last week, the authorities said.
Gift link to article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/oregon-avalanche-forecaster-killed.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ck0.14-M.L0Yl6P6xmheO&smid=url-share
As much as I’m intrigued by the idea of getting into back country skiing, every time I read a news report about someone who is an expert in back country skiing dying while doing it I get discouraged. I don’t mind risk taking - I’ve been riding motorcycles on and off road as well as racing for 50 years. The thing I don’t like is that even if you do everything right you can still get got, and it seems to happen at a much higher rate than it does on motorcycles.
One answer would be to simply ratchet down how close the edge you’re willing to push things when skiing in the back country. I suppose I could do that, but geez I’d get bored, I fear. I know myself well enough to know that I like to push myself - it’s where the learning comes from. Need to keep thinking about this as I’m getting truly disillusioned with skiing otherwise. Groomers are starting to bore me. Dying doesn’t seem like all that much fun. I love skiing. What to do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Groomers are starting to bore me. Dying doesn’t seem like all that much fun. I love skiing. What to do?
|
It's the beauty of n American in bounds off piste. Ski the craziest terrain with almost zero avy risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
@Tom_Ski,
experts tend to have much higher exposure - they just spend a lot more days in avalanche terrain than normal people. That is the key reason that they tend to die more in avalanches. If they reduce the risk by 80% but expose themselves 10x as much then they are more at risk.
You have to make your own choices about such things but if you think you have limited self-discipline I'd suggest restricting your back country adventures to LOW risk days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@Tom_Ski, around 1500 people are killed on UK roads every year.
Over 5000 die in accidents at home.
Also consider % number of deaths versus number of skier days.
I am not saying there is no risk, no need to consider the risks but some perspective is always required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
True and true. I have only spent a few days in Europe skiing a month or two ago, so the whole “auf piste” thing was a new concept. Didn’t realize how good we do have it skiing here in the US in terms of relative safety of skiing inbounds, even in lots of terrain that in Europe would be auf piste, and therefore inherently riskier. Interesting.
And yes, perhaps restricting to low risk days would be the way to go for back country stuff. Still…I wonder how many people die when it’s a low risk day? Things change quickly in the mountains from what I can gather, including risk levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Tom_Ski wrote: |
| And yes, perhaps restricting to low risk days would be the way to go for back country stuff. Still…I wonder how many people die when it’s a low risk day? Things change quickly in the mountains from what I can gather, including risk levels. |
by low, do you mean risk 1? Very very few people die on a risk 1 day from avalanches, quite a few from falls given risk 1 can mean boilerplate so timing and route choice is important.
or do you mean risk 1 and 2?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Being completely untrained and thus pretty ignorant of avi safety protocols and ratings, I’m not sure how to answer your question. Based on what little I do understand, I would think that 1 or 2 would be acceptable to those wishing to minimize risk and still enjoy back country skiing. Of course, skiing only inbounds or staying home and watching TV would likely be safer. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
The risk of a skier dying in an avalanche worldwide is roughly 0.00004%.
The hysteria far outweighs the risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Hysteria?
Data source?
Is that a lot or a little?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Everyone knows someone who had something bad happen to them. Everyone has a different approach to managing risk, and a different appetite for taking on various levels of risk. I'm sure if you asked Alex Honnold about the amount of risk he takes, he'd probably tell you he always keeps it within a limit that's acceptable to him while I get queasy just watching some of his climbs on tv. It's good to be comfortable with your choices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tom_Ski wrote: |
| Being completely untrained and thus pretty ignorant of avi safety protocols and ratings, I’m not sure how to answer your question. Based on what little I do understand, I would think that 1 or 2 would be acceptable to those wishing to minimize risk and still enjoy back country skiing. |
Ok, so low in terms of what the skier in the street understands it to mean.
In France 8% of fatal avalanche incidents occur at risk 2, the figure is 29% in Switzerland as the Swiss are more reluctant to move to risk 3 for administrative reasons.
These are the full French and Swiss figures but for 1996-2006, things may have evolved somewhat as countries try to harmonize their risk assessment. I was a bit shocked to hear a well known YouTuber and freerider say that he thought the avalanche risk was "Only 3" the other day after he triggered an avalanche (it was actually 4).
1: 0%, 3%
2: 8%, 29%
3: 49%, 54%
4: 38%, 12%
5: 5%, 1%
As others have pointed out above, we are talking about 20 or so fatalities per year in France. (currently 12 in CH) so your chance of getting killed is not high
Rather than using the avalanche risk, try the Risk Reduction Method, it takes more factors into account
https://www.bergfreunde.eu/munter-reduction-method-calculator/
Say you wanted to ski today off piste in Val d'Isere
Avalanche Risk is 2, you are going to ski mellow slopes (<35 degrees) but on N sectors, you are sticking to regularly skied off piste and you are a small group. Risk is 0.3. That's a Go! (with the usual precautions).
Using this method will force you to take a look at the avalanche bulletin and read the detail.
Oh and your best chance of survival is to have an airbag
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@davidof,
| Quote: |
Oh and your best chance of survival is to have an airbag
|
And a beacon & shovel & probe and chums who have the same and know how to use them.
In terms of the risk I'm not sure it's as low as all that. Over the last 40 years living here in Bavaria I have nearly been avvied twice, have had a ski chum who was fully buried but dug out by others in the group, and have had a ski chum who was fully buried and killed. Just sayin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
experts tend to have much higher exposure - they just spend a lot more days in avalanche terrain than normal people.
|
That's true. However, you also need to consider that experts don't always practice what they preach! I'm sure plenty of guides who died in avalanches were skiing stuff they wouldn't ever have taken clients on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
