 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
People ski closed pistes all the time. And it’s incredibly rare to result in a fatality. There’s a big difference in risk between a piste closed due to a few rocks showing versus a steep, mogulled ice rink due to frozen rain that would be pretty much unskiable without race sharp edges and very strong technique. They know people ignore generic signs. Be interested to know if the signage was specific to the level of risk? I think they should do this in Verbier on some popular off piste routes when conditions are particularly delicate. But I guess it then opens them up to legal exposure. This was a tragic misjudgment from the victim and is very sad for those he left behind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@BobinCH, which is why I’d be interested to see the output from the Swiss investigation. The piste was closed by a big orange net from one side to the other blocking the whole entrance - you’d have had to make some effort to get round it (rather than ducking a rope).
The previous thread dealt with the issue of Swiss Wall being “a big tick” that people are tempted to get on because they’re there and it “has to be done” - when there’s plenty of tricky/steep/bumpy runs to be done elsewhere in the area. So given that it has this attraction, maybe there should be some consideration given to signage etc when closed because of dangerous conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 wrote: |
| People ski closed pistes all the time. And it’s incredibly rare to result in a fatality. There’s a big difference in risk between a piste closed due to a few rocks showing versus a steep, mogulled ice rink due to frozen rain that would be pretty much unskiable without race sharp edges and very strong technique. They know people ignore generic signs. Be interested to know if the signage was specific to the level of risk? I think they should do this in Verbier on some popular off piste routes when conditions are particularly delicate. But I guess it then opens them up to legal exposure. This was a tragic misjudgment from the victim and is very sad for those he left behind. |
Ug. Damn. That means I'm going to have to "reverse ferret" on the closure thing.
When I said "closed means closed, I was thinking about BC, where people never disobey posted warnings, in my experience as a punter and riding with the patrol. In BC, if it says closed, it's closed. There are penalties for ignoring closures, temporary or permanent, but people don't do it because it's unwise. If the forest is closed, the snow depth isn't sufficient. If the cliff is closed, it's not yet been bombed, or it's 10cm of snow on granite you don't want to ride. The patrol is seen as being on the side of getting stuff opened, and everyone knows that. I have "ducked ropes" with the patrol and no one follows: folk know the rules and why they're there.
But then you go and mention "Verbier", and I remember last season I was there, it works differently in Europe....
I was with a few people with one race sharp edge each and none likely to fall. It was icy, so we waited for the sun to warm the Mont Fort bumps into condition. By that time there were still fresh lines available off the piste to skier's far right, which we went back to take advantage of a few times. Eventually we decided to drop down to Tortin. We'd travelled over it in the lift earlier, so we knew it was open, and it wasn't obviously short of snow. The long run-out from Mont Fort takes you to the Tortin "itinerary" sign, which said "closed" and had a bunch of entirely adequate warnings about the risks of what we were about to do.
Despite being marked closed, the run was obviously "open", with crowds - more than on Mont Fort - going down the easy start. Many looked to be novices. It seemed open. I think Mont Gelé had had similar "closed" signs, but the lift up there was running (an open lift to a closed run?), and it was fine.
We plodded down, and avoided the hordes by going way off to skiers left, hoping for better conditions and fewer skiers. We found others had had the same idea in earlier days, and the the whole mountainside was pretty much icy bumps you'd not want to fall on. "Transport", not fun. We were however alone out there, no other folk in sight, which meant we could control our spacing and pick our lines. Those crowds had all gone somewhere else. Eventually our run closed down to a constriction back on skiers right, followed by a run-out you need to hit fast to avoid walking.
As we traversed back to the main line we saw where the crowds had all gone - what was a piste may now be an itinerary, but most folk were treating it as a piste, and sticking pretty much to what was probably the line of the old piste. As we traversed in to their slope, things looked ugly, with most folk sitting not skiing. The constriction was maybe 50m wide, no one was descending with any style or much control. The local experts of course wouldn't want to be there. A lot came down on their bottoms, interspersed with various bits of their equipment, usually single skis, but sometimes both, or poles. It was carnage, funny or scary depending on how you look at it.
We had to cut into the path of that, make a few turns, then start the long flat run-out as early as possible with maximum speed. We all made it, but you'd not want to fall there, at those speeds. In my memory bits of equipment littered the run-out, but I may be imagining that.
So I was wrong: closed does not mean "do not enter" in Europe. We made a poor route choice because of our lack of experience of the area and failure to understand local mores. We weren't at much risk, but it was risk without reward, so a bad decision. Lesson learnt - or remembered - closed can sometimes mean "unpleasant" in Europe.
I would imagine that the Verbier patrol will look at the accident stats from that slope in those circumstances and decide if it's best to physically close it (as they had with the Swiss Wall with multiple fence, or with a stationed patroller) or run it with warning signs as they were doing. I didn't see any blood wagons, so I think they probably made the correct choice that day. I'm fine with their operating procedure, but not being there for a few decades led me to forget what it is.
I don't think there's a massive issue here either way. But learning from this type of incident probably makes everyone a bit safer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Off topic but one thing to consider is that if you duck the ropes other people, perhaps less experienced or skilled might follow your lead. I know we can't be responsible for other people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@phil_w, indeed.
Here the topography means that if they want to "close" a particular slope, they'll generally close the access lift.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| phil_w wrote: |
I don't think there's a massive issue here either way. But learning from this type of incident probably makes everyone a bit safer. |
Er, the lesson is closed means closed, its not hard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So are we saying there's 3 grades of Euro closure?
I. This really won't be much fun and you should choose a different route
II. This run isn't complete and you may have a long walk or a lot of damage to your kit
III. Are you mad? Seriously there is major avy or long slide/ice risk here
So the challenge is distinguishing between them in the context of a punter mindset that says "I am a ski god and they're just trying to spoil my fun/ access to my lovely powpoe"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Those are the difference in outcomes @Dave of the Marmottes, if you have that mindset it's a case of caveat skier.
Having said that, I would perceive a different risk level from a sole closed sign vs three layers of fencing as in this case (regardless, I chickened out on my only trip to the Swiss Wall when it was open)
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| ster wrote: |
| phil_w wrote: |
I don't think there's a massive issue here either way. But learning from this type of incident probably makes everyone a bit safer. |
Er, the lesson is closed means closed, its not hard. |
+1.
Why all this squirming over the meaning of closed? It's like saying someone is only a little bit pregnant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| So are we saying there's 3 grades of Euro closure? |
I think perhaps it's better to consider a European closure (as opposed to a BC one!) as more like when the patrol puts sticks up to mark a specific hazard.
Those sticks do not physically stop you from riding through them, they're merely telling you that in the view of local mountain safety professionals, you won't like doing that.
I think on that trip Mont Gelé was "closed" too, although the lift to it was open. I think they had warnings at the lift base also. Klassen was there - there was nothing wrong with the run, other than it was a bit "high consequence". That was much better than Tortin, as there was no one on it. The signs worked. But that's not a transport route.
Closing the access lifts in order to actually close a piste is the obvious approach in Europe as someone just said.
North America has a different relationship between lifts and runs, so a different approach makes sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
A sad and sobering case. There is definitely a culture in the Alps that closed piste signs are considered advisory only so unless this was particularly well fenced off (I've never been to the PDS so don't know how effectively this is closed) his actions shouldn't be viewed as too out of the ordinary
Hands up, I've skied past piste closed signs. I do only do this on pistes where it is clear that the only reason for the closure is a small bare patch or a bit of grass poking through, the kind of conditions that would be classed as good in Scotland but isn't seen as acceptable in the Alps. Last time I was in Val d'Isere they put signs saying 'Manque du neige' and 'good skiers only' at the top of some of the steeper runs that weren't in great condition. I like this approach, it allows you to make an informed decision as to whether you want to ski it and you are then much more likely to respect the closed piste signs as you know that is for something more serious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@rambotion, IME when they close the wall, it's pretty well fenced off. And usually immediately obvious to anyone with a shred of sense, exactly why (as you can see the blue ice).
If you really then want to ski it you can cut round the corner and drop in to one of the couloirs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe it was commented at the time (by people who had been in resort) that it was very well fenced off and in no doubt that it was closed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| SnoodyMcFlude wrote: |
| I believe it was commented at the time (by people who had been in resort) that it was very well fenced off and in no doubt that it was closed. |
Correct - big orange net right across the entrance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
As it happens just realised we were skiing Avoriaz on 4th Feb, a few days before the accident, which was during a spell of good warm weather. I recall the advanced pistes off Grandes Combes were marked and fenced off as closed in the morning due to ice which was probably similar to the Swiss Wall during that period. We had lunch on top of the Swiss Wall that day and I’ve attached pictures from the top at 12:30 - I remember snow being heavy spring like by that time. You can see from the photos they have an open/closed warning sign as well as the type of netting that is used to close the slope, which in this case is open out of the picture. It would have have been a bold decision to get up there by 9:30 (especially from Morzine) and either climb under or go around the edge of the net where there is limited space to do so. Perhaps he wanted to do a lap of PDS. This thread would not exist had he waited a couple of hours or decided to descend into Switzerland from the Mossets ridge further along.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| rambotion wrote: |
A sad and sobering case. There is definitely a culture in the Alps that closed piste signs are considered advisory only so unless this was particularly well fenced off (I've never been to the PDS so don't know how effectively this is closed) his actions shouldn't be viewed as too out of the ordinary
Hands up, I've skied past piste closed signs. I do only do this on pistes where it is clear that the only reason for the closure is a small bare patch or a bit of grass poking through, the kind of conditions that would be classed as good in Scotland but isn't seen as acceptable in the Alps. Last time I was in Val d'Isere they put signs saying 'Manque du neige' and 'good skiers only' at the top of some of the steeper runs that weren't in great condition. I like this approach, it allows you to make an informed decision as to whether you want to ski it and you are then much more likely to respect the closed piste signs as you know that is for something more serious. |
There are places in N America that post "Early season conditions - rocks, stumps, stream crossings and other obstacles may exist and be unmarked" or "Experts only" signs on terrain, throughout the season. This serves as a Cat I warning that it could be hard work as ordinary punter. I know if I'm in a new place I tend to heed them until I can scope out the terrain from elsewhere because climbing over successive whoops is a pain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| rambotion wrote: |
A sad and sobering case. There is definitely a culture in the Alps that closed piste signs are considered advisory only so unless this was particularly well fenced off (I've never been to the PDS so don't know how effectively this is closed) his actions shouldn't be viewed as too out of the ordinary
Hands up, I've skied past piste closed signs. I do only do this on pistes where it is clear that the only reason for the closure is a small bare patch or a bit of grass poking through, the kind of conditions that would be classed as good in Scotland but isn't seen as acceptable in the Alps. Last time I was in Val d'Isere they put signs saying 'Manque du neige' and 'good skiers only' at the top of some of the steeper runs that weren't in great condition. I like this approach, it allows you to make an informed decision as to whether you want to ski it and you are then much more likely to respect the closed piste signs as you know that is for something more serious. |
There are places in N America that post "Early season conditions - rocks, stumps, stream crossings and other obstacles may exist and be unmarked" or "Experts only" signs on terrain, throughout the season. This serves as a Cat I warning that it could be hard work as ordinary punter. I know if I'm in a new place I tend to heed them until I can scope out the terrain from elsewhere because climbing over successive whoops is a pain. |
This is sensible IMO. Had there been a sign saying something like « closed due to icy conditions after rain which froze last night. Extremely dangerous. Do not attempt to ski this slope this morning whatever your level » would it have made the guy change his mind?
I wrote an IG post about Highway to Heaven, a popular off piste route in Verbier, after a few fatal avalanche there. If there was a sign saying « extreme caution, recent fatal avalanches on this slope in similar conditions » I’m sure it would make people think twice about skiing it.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CqFi4Baux4W/?igsh=MXRrbXhpZzlpcmpscA==
If the ski patrol know about elevated risks why not communicate them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Have never seen the appeal, even in good conditions.
Know a few friends who proudly exclaim they have conquered the Swiss Wall. In reality they slid down parts of it on their back bottom and frequently tumbled head over foot. That isn't what skiing is about. But hey, they have a Strava file with an orange line down the run proving they've done it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I guess the more verbiage the ski patrol is expected to produce (and in how many languages?) the more scope there is for legal nit-picking ("they noted the patches of grass but failed to highlight the dangerous tree root which caused my client to fall and break his neck".
Closed means closed. Keep it simple. Ski it at your own risk (and without insurance).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| andy from embsay wrote: |
| SnoodyMcFlude wrote: |
| I believe it was commented at the time (by people who had been in resort) that it was very well fenced off and in no doubt that it was closed. |
Correct - big orange net right across the entrance. |
When I was there the week before this happened it wasn't a big orange net right across the entrance - it was 3 rows of bright orange fence across the entrance. Subtle it was not, neither was it missable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@NoMapNoCompass, disagree. On a nice day in good snow it’s a very fine piste. I’ve skied it many, many times, including on snow blades (WTAF?) and in jeans on a mono.
But it is over-skied and overpopulated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| BobinCH wrote: |
| ... [more precise information would help] IMO. Had there been a sign saying something like « closed due to icy conditions after rain which froze last night. Extremely dangerous. Do not attempt to ski this slope this morning whatever your level » would it have made the guy change his mind? ...If the ski patrol know about elevated risks why not communicate them? |
Would that sign go in front of or behind the three rows of orange netting preventing physical access to the slope? 
I guess I mean that the reason they even had to erect those fences is that signage doesn't work, and/or that the Euro concept of "closed" leaves it ambiguous. A fence is not ambiguous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@BobinCH, you should post that pic of the slope in summer - it brings home the steepness to me more than winter shots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Ozboy, nothing says "competitive people should give it a go" quite like a big "this is dangerous" sign.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Kirkwood actually post a skull and crossbones at the bottom (lift entrance) and top of the Wall. You still see Jerries bouncing down it every day even without attempting one of the sketchier entrances which may require mandatory airs or ability to not pinball off rock walls.
The Skull and Crossbones probably does more for marketing than safety though keeps patrol in a job. (you can fully scope the terrain from the bottom and an adjacent lift so there isn't really any excuse for the Jerries other than the "boasting" gene")
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| phil_w wrote: |
| BobinCH wrote: |
| ... [more precise information would help] IMO. Had there been a sign saying something like « closed due to icy conditions after rain which froze last night. Extremely dangerous. Do not attempt to ski this slope this morning whatever your level » would it have made the guy change his mind? ...If the ski patrol know about elevated risks why not communicate them? |
Would that sign go in front of or behind the three rows of orange netting preventing physical access to the slope?
I guess I mean that the reason they even had to erect those fences is that signage doesn't work, and/or that the Euro concept of "closed" leaves it ambiguous. A fence is not ambiguous. |
If there was a great big fence that’s great. All I’m saying is make it clear why it’s there if you know that there’s a mortal risk, which is not typically not the case.
For example, there are permanent fences blocking the route under the main gondola in Verbier I assume because there are tree stumps and all manner of other surprises under there, in a thin snow pack. On the other hand, once they are buried it’s one of the best tree lined powder chutes on a bad weather day and I take my kids there.
There is a long fence blocking the access to Col des mines / Vallon d’arbi due to avalanches onto the access track that the piste basher needs to clear. And yet you regularly see guides taking their clients there as they get info that the track is not blocked and it’s an epic route if you get it before it opens
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@BobinCH, what do want, a personalised notice, Dear Bob, this run is closed as its very icy. Please take our word for it that it would pose undue risk given your ability as a skier
Dear Mr Feller, although this run is icy we feel some one with your skills should gave little problem negotiating it, have a fun day!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
FIS rule 8 seems pretty clear on this:
A skier or snowboarder must respect all signs and markings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
@BobinCH, with respect you're probably part of the problem vs punters. As a rad local you know why a route is fenced off and have local knowledge and grapevine to make sensible decisions. But your alpha male have a go hero touron doesn't. He sees you and your kids skipping past a fence and thinks must be ok.
Not your fault obviously but if everyone experienced adopts an attitude that closure is only advisory then this won't be the last such incident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
@BobinCH, with respect you're probably part of the problem vs punters. As a rad local you know why a route is fenced off and have local knowledge and grapevine to make sensible decisions. But your alpha male have a go hero touron doesn't. He sees you and your kids skipping past a fence and thinks must be ok.
Not your fault obviously but if everyone experienced adopts an attitude that closure is only advisory then this won't be the last such incident. |
Not denying that. All I’m saying is that if you acknowledge it’s inevitable then can they do more than in particularly risky spots. I think it’s possible, even if as you suggest it possibly opens them up to legal exposure
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Imho people are overthinking this. A tricky route with a certain notoriety was clearly closed and a skier decided to ignore this and chance his arm. Sadly, he ran out of luck. Why should the ski area do anything more than having the route closed & barred? And yes, like many others I have ignored such warnings and skied past such "closed signs." I have, however. always been aware of the consequences - not least that I wouldn't expect any sympathy (posthumous or otherwise) if I too ran out of luck/talent. I'd compare it with (in my younger days) soloing a rock-climbing route rather than doing it with a partner and a rack of gear + rope. Sure, take the risk if you want, but you have no one to blame but yourself if it goes wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@Bergsteiger278, nail on head
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Yep
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
When I said "closed means closed, I was thinking about BC, where people never disobey posted warnings
|
People definitely do! Only have to look back to last April when 2 skiers entered west bowl at lake Louise when it was marked "closed due to high avalanche risk" and 1 died in the slide they triggered.
"Poaching" fabled lines in permanent closures does happen.
But I would agree that the harsh punishments (lift pass taken) if caught are a big disincentive.
Then again other than avalanche closures I don't remember seeing runs "closed" in bc. Usually it was more warnings and strong advice to avoid, which many ignored (including myself). Even the "Experts only" signs are generally ignored and perhaps even seen as a challenge by some.
Seen plenty pass by similar to this https://c8.alamy.com/comp/AMBPBT/warning-signs-at-backcountry-access-gate-where-ski-trail-leaves-the-AMBPBT.jpg
(could you be any clearer?!) nonchalantly with no avi equipment.
I just don't think any sign would completely work, there will always be some that ignore it. If the resort put up a closed sign and 3 layers of netting I think they have done as much as can be realistically expected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| boarder2020 wrote: |
| ... Then again other than avalanche closures I don't remember seeing runs "closed" in bc. ... |
Some "Runs" are nearly always closed early season, when there's insufficient snow, in the places I ride in BC at least. I've witnessed the same thing in the Alps, eg Zermatt, Les Deux Alpes, Sölden and Ishgl. It's very common. That is basically because you need a certain amount of snow to make them viable/ safe. Ride Big White trees before the base is filled in and you'll break things. Ride this run [below] and your edges will be done and if you fall it'll hurt.
This image from last December shows a previously closed for the season run being opened in December 2023:
There had only been only two tracks on that entire face & the run out, from the bombing run the day before. That was us too.
You don't get many "closed because a section in the middle is a 10m rock band" type closures in BC, if that's what you mean. Although the bottom section of WB for example late season is often be in a state which would be "closed" (and ignored) in the Alps, but they just post how bad it is, and most people download. The protocols used are different, but the effect is the similar.
But my text, which you quoted, didn't mention "runs" at - you introduced that term. The next line was: "There are penalties for ignoring closures, temporary or permanent, but people don't do it because it's unwise". Take a look at your piste map if you don't remember where the permanently closed terrain is. If I'd known I was in court, I'd have probably said "non-criminal people"; obviously there are a few crazy people. The point was entirely about the difference between what "closed" means in the Alps versus at Sunshine for people whose name isn't Scurfield. The overwhelming vast majority of people in BC do not ride closed terrain, in my direct experience. Which I do remember.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Switzerland (compared to UK & France) feels much more ‘at your own risk’ in my experience. It’s why we are all insured to the nth degree. Personal responsibility needs to improve, not signage and rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
