Avalanches claim victims in the Savoie

A snowHead

Sadly the mountains have claimed more victims today, including a British man who was swept away by an avalanche when snowboarding off-piste on the Villaroger side of the Les Arcs domain. Apparently the pisteurs arrived on the scene quickly but were unable to resuscitate him. Avalanche risk today was already at 4 (high risk) on a scale of 5, and the piste security has confirmed that it may rise to 5 from tomorrow...

Just last night kuwait ian and flying squirrel were socialising with the victim, question master during the 'pub quiz' at Will's bar in Plan Peisey - . Both are pretty shaken up.

The accident took place in the Combe des Lanchettes, a steep north-facing couloir a few minutes' walk from the top of the Lanchettes chair. The first descent is extremely steep and particularly hazardous.

rob@rar, kuwait ian and I were skiing in the Villaroger sector all day today. Much as the knee-deep power looked tempting, the warnings were signposted everywhere and we happily stuck to the piste. We saw boarders and the occasional skier going off-piste on numerous occasions.

A snowHead

I heard this morning that a friend lost her daughter and son in law in Crans Montana on Sunday. From what I can make out from the Swiss papers they were skiing on piste, but in the poor visibility couldn't find the lift and unfortunately decided that going under the rope to cross over to another piste would help. They didn't know the resort very well and they went the wrong way, triggered a slab and were carried over a 70m cliff and down the neighbouring valley for 1500m.

They were 26 and 27. The funeral won't be until April, when the bodies are recovered.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

PG
Sorry to hear that tragic news, hope kuwait ian and flying squirrel are ok.
I just can't understand why people take such risks, it really isn't worth it.
Brooksie

You need to Login to know who's really who.

A total of 4 avalanche victims so far today in the Savoie.

The first avalanche was triggered by a snowboarder, off-piste on his own on the slopes above Val Thorens. He was not rescued in time.

A woman skier and her guidewho were heading for the Col de Tougne in La Plagne, set off another avalanche. The guide managed to extract himself but the skier died.

The above-mentioned incident in Les Arcs occurred when the British snowboarder, ARVA-equipped, set off a massive slide at the top of the Combe des Lanchettes. He was located very rapidly, thanks to his ARVA, but was already dead.

Finally in Val d'Isère, several skiers were swept away by an avalanche. All were rescued except for one who was gravely hurt, later succumbing to his injuries.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

(UPDATE)

The Les Arcs piste security director has confirmed that a pisteur and an instructor were able to get to the scene very quickly.The ARVA signal led them to the location of the boarder, and they then spotted his board, sticking up slightly above the snow. The spokesman pointed out that it was a typical snowboarding accident - the board tends to "float" on the surface of the moving snow, with the boarder inverted, ending up upside down when the slide comes to a halt. Another five minutes to dig him out, but by then it was too late.

The accident occurred outside the ski domain proper, ie in the area known as "ski de montagne". The security services are not allowed to set off controlled avalanches beyond the ski area limits.

Our sincere condolences go to the family of the victim, the Ski Beat manager, in his second season in the resort.

You'll need to Register first of course.

all terribly tragic. My condolences to all of the familys involved.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

The resort tries to limit skiing in this protected area (to the right of the Aiguille Rouge run along the crest as you head down) via a by-law that obliges visitors to either take an accredited guide, or complete an 'awareness' course on the environmental issues of this area, classified as a nature reserve. Within the reserve there are authorised routes. Skiing without a guide or the relevant permit can result in a fine - if caught. The Lanchettes (scene of yesterday's avalanche) and the Grand Col are the only two itineraries allowed.

However despite the hefty fine, some skiers and boarders seem to do as they please. Many use the 5 other off-piste itineraries that are strictly forbidden. A study revealed 1,610 tracks in the Grandes Pentes (up to 150 descents per day), the dangerous S couloir 230 tracks, the Paravalanches relatively few as there is a long climb to the summit to take this route, and finally the "Combe Interdite", with 200 tracks, up to 20 descents per day).

In the two recognised routes there were 7,300 tracks in the Lanchettes, and 5,650 in the Grand Col ...

A grand total of some 16,000 descents over the length of one season (1999/2000), 3,000 on forbidden routes. A total of 257 people had taken the awareness course, lasting a morning and costing some £28, at that time.

32 skiers/boarders, inculding 17 pros, were caught and fined over that winter. 18 have yet to pay up. The majority get away with it because there are only sporadic checks and because they cut through the forest to avoid the areas where there may be resort personnel at the end of the runs.

The reserve was originally set up with the intention of protecting some rare wildlife, including the tetras lyre, a sort of "snow grouse" that builds itself a mini snow igloo to spend most of the winter, only emerging occasional in search of food (buds, pine needles)...

Obviously resort security cannot detonate explosives within the reserve, so after a heavy fall of snow on old snow, plummeting temperatures, and strong winds, yesterday's tragic event was an accident waiting to happen. There were signs everywhere warning people not to venture off piste until the mantle had settled down. It was barely 24 hours since the latest heavy snowfall, and while mountain lore advises two or three days for the new layer to bind, this is only the minimum - it can take longer, depending on conditions.

After all it is free

"Russian roulette"

Reports from The Scotsman ... BBC Online.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Any more info on the Val Thorens/Les Menuires avalanche? Brings it home when it is somewhwere you've been alot

snow reports

It's a tricky one, the couple that got lost its tragic, incredibly sad. It's all too easily done, especially when you panic.

But, for people that do intend to head off piste, if the avalanche warnings are up and the warnings at the lifet stations say don't go off piste (which they definitely do, i skiied this time last year in Les Arcs, and had my first experience of extreme weather conditions) then they are putting the rescue services at risk. But having said that it's still very sad to read that someone has lost his life.

We all know snowsports can be dangerous. I suppose the amount of deaths compared to the amount of people on the snow during one season makes it relatively safe in terms of percentages (I am speculating here).

Accidents on piste with collisions will happen to, with sometimes fatalities. However serious off pisting, even with guides, can be risky. I don't know what the stats on triggering an avalanche are if somebody is skiing/boarding in danger rated off piste areas but I think the situation is that if you are foolhardy/unlucky to be caught up in an avalanche your chances of surviving it are at best slim.

You know it makes sense.

Philip Prior, While you are right about the number of deaths compared with the number that ski, that in itself is not a very valid statistic. Its like saying the number of people killed crossing the road is small compared with the numers who cross road when you are talking about games of dare running across motorways! The problem is that very resort director's worst nightmare is the first sunny day after a big fall because they know that in all likelihood, somebody is going to die. Yesterday was a classic example, it was entirely predictable and in many ways the suprise is that more weren't killed.

More importantly, your assumption that if you are caught in an avalanche your chances of survival are slim is a dangerous myth. At the time an avalanche stops, 80% of victims are still alive, the rest having been killed by impact. From there on, the length of time buried is the key factor on your survival chances. 93% of those still alive when the avalanche stopped who are rescued inside 5 minutes survive. Even at 30 minutes, 50% survive. Then it goes down quickly - 35 minutes only 33% survive.

So getting a person out quickly is the key. 75% of all those caught in an avalanche will survive if got out in 5 minutes. By saying their chances are at best slim leads to people not mounting proper rescues, using correct equipment etc.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

OK I agree with all but your last sentence. By me voicing an opinion that surviving an avalanche is slim will not lead people to abandon proper searchs or use correct equipment.

A snowHead

OK, Phil, maybe I did get a bit carried away Embarassed

A snowHead

No worries! Smile

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

The French guy who died in Val d'Isère was a personal friend of 30 years of Hannou's head of ski studies at the Bourg college. He had skied with him many times, and admitted that he wasn't surprised when he heard the news. An Air France pilot, on the point of taking retirement, he was an expert skier but took risks that Hannou's teacher wouldn't allow. On several occasions he had turned back from descents when his friend would "chance it". He paid the ultimate price.

Just thinking aloud, but around Les Arcs yesterday there were just as many people heading off-piste as the day before, some in particularly dangerous areas, despite the signs at the bottom of most lifts "Avalanche risque 4 - fort".

But perhaps people need a more stark warning than the rather impersonal 1-5 scale? (which quite possibly means not a lot to most skiers/boarders on the slopes ...)

How about something along the lines of (at least in English and French here in France):

You need to Login to know who's really who.

The recent evidence from the US suggests that even if you make dangerous zones more obvious with ropes, gates and skull+crossbones signs, death-wish skiers ignore them.

The only friend I've lost to an avalanche - Willy Bailey, a former member of the British ski team in the era of Konrad Bartelski and Peter Fuchs (who also sadly died, in a car crash between Aviemore and Carrbridge) - lost his life on a slope above Verbier, known to be dangerous.

As you've indicated, risk-taking is a very individual thing and the issue is how the balance of law, rescue and liberty is struck. The sport is threatened by over-zealous control and, to some extent, excessive signage. If people want to ignore advice and risk their lives they will do so. As you've said, the posted avalanche warnings are always around. No sane off-piste skier ignores them.

On a more mundane level, hundreds of thousands of skiers are injured each season simply because they've economised on lessons that would dramatically cut their risk of falling over (not to mention multiply their enjoyment of the snow) and optimise control of their own skis.

I know a surgeon (yes, a surgeon) who goes to the fitness club near me. He used to ski a lot but showed me his scars from past ski accidents. I asked him the other day if he was going this winter, and he told me he "can't risk it anymore". He's never taken a ski lesson!

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Re: persuading people not to go under the fence in Level 4 or 5 conditions

Any parrallels with the campaigns to persuade bikers/boy racers not to do 90mph on the Snake Pass, etc? Police forces/road saftey officers take two approaches. Either the twisted bike displayed at the start of the accident blackspot or have police riders using the road and 'getting along side' the potential casualties in the caff. The gruseome approach would be to put pics of avalanche rescue and recovery pics by the lifts... The ride-along would be to put off-pisteurs in the vicinity to spot the boy racers and reason.......

You'll need to Register first of course.

IMO, this whole problem is one of education.
The whole situation is also exasperated by a number of factors. Firstly, equipment develoments means that more and more people can enjoy off piste skiing without having developed the skills and taken the lessons to learn how and why. And, of course, these are the same people who don't take lessons anyway. The next problem is that more lifts make more areas accessable and resorts are even puting in faster lifts to serve well known routes. And the third problem is that there are more organised groups going off piste. Although they might be safe, it gives the impression that the whole of an area is safe. A story to illustrate....

I was skiing in Val D'Isere with a mountain guide with the risk at 3 but in some areas it was really 4. We cut a high traverse around the Charvet to get to one of the last pitches on the north face. We left big gaps and moved from point of safety to point of safety, wtching each other as we went. It became clear that the area was pretty unstable and we carefully chose a ridge to ski down leaving very tight tracks so as not to hit the accumulations either side in the dips. At the bottom we noticed agroup of 4 skiers traversing in our tracks ina tight group. Our guide was pretty agitated by this and insisted we stayed to watch them down safely. They then stopped on top of a ridge and proceeded one at a time straight down one of the slab filled dips. Luckily the first two skied out and stopped on a ridge. The third skier made his first turn when the slope gave way and thankfully he wasn't acrried down. it wasn't a big slide but it would have buried anybody caught in its path. They were lucky.

We waited for the very shaken group to ski down and our quide, fairly tactlessly, started having a go, asking them what on earth they were playing at. Their reply was that as they saw a guide ski round there they thought it was safe to follow so long as they stayed in the tracks. However, they had wanted to make fresh tracks so skied as close as they could to ours, which of course was in the area of maximum danger.

How do you legislate against that sort of thing? We don't want Europe to become like the States. The problem is that as more people venture off piste, more people are being caught in slides started by others, usually skiing above and ignoring all etiquette. maybe its time for some sort of licence system, with the licence being gained following an awareness course.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Human nature is such that unecessary risks will be taken intentionally an unintentionally, people will be injured and worse die. People will always search for reasons why and how it could have been avoided but it always comes full circle to the individual. They may well be some people out there who consider a substantial risk of death as their motivation however mad that seems to us. I think a large percentage also may be ignorant to the dangers of off pisting aswell. I dunno, but you can only give so much advice and warnings to people. Beyond that people should be prepared for the consequences.

After all it is free

Philip Prior, Totally agree that you can only give so much advice and warning, but surely the question is "is enough being done"? I think not.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

SimonN, the teacher I mentioned above learnt his lesson very early on in his career, nearly 40 years ago. A similar situation to yours. With a fellow guide he had taken a group into an area that was presumed safe, but instinct told him otherwise. Faced with the prospect of an hour's trek back to the starting point, he decided to chance it. He instructed the group to go down singly, precisely following his tracks, on his signal (assuming he got down safely himself, of course).

No problems getting down, then one by one the others followed, sticking to his instructions by staying precisely in his tracks. All got down safely - leaving just his fellow guide. He thought he knew better and decided to make fresh tracks. On his very first turn, the whole slab released. A massive slide, and when it stopped he appeared to be completely buried. No fancy equipment to locate him in those days of course, but as luck would have it a student spotted the tip of a ski sticking out. They made their way across, dug away like crazy, and eventually got him out. He wasn't breathing, turning blue, mouth and nose full of snow, but when they managed to clear his airways he made one huge choking gasp, and slowly came to. He was lucky - another few seconds and he wouldn't have made it. Still, as group leader, the first teacher blamed himself - he should have gone back, despite the long walk, rather than take the chance. A lesson learnt - and perhaps that's why he's still alive today - and his pilot friend is not.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

PG, I think you have hit on a key point. Most of us who are zelots about safety have personal experiences that motivate them. Thankfully, I have never been caught in a slide but I have seen them, have dug peiople out from them and lost friends. I was also fortunate to ski with one of the most safety consious people I have ever know, namely the late Giles Green and I have also been much influenced by Henry Schniewind in Val D'Isere. If my "rants" and stories can make just on person think, then its worth while. I also think that those of us who have had a lot of pleasure from the sport should give something back, hence my crusades!

snow reports

SimonN, So for those of us who haven't seen the results of an avalanche at first hand, is a sign saying "avalanche risque 4 - fort" good enough?

If not, what sort of info should the resorts be putting on display? How stark a message?

I'm normally of the opinion - that you make the warnings clear - and leave the idiots to chance it.
The bit that worries me is the way our world is developing and people realise they can make money through the court system. My nightmare scenario is people go off piste, ignoring the warnings. They either make it through an avalanche but sue the resort for not preventing them from going off piste adequately enough (or distraught relatives pursue the claim). Either way, resorts have to spend more money, their insurance goes up, and it results in higher prices for the sensible majority. (Repeat of the ambulance chasers/legal firms and what they've done to car insurance costs)

You know it makes sense.

I think the harsh reality of avalanche deaths are only known to users of forums such as this, which accounts for only a small (but growing Wink

) proportion of the sliding population. I think warnings around resorts, such as PG suggested, saying that there had been various avalanches in certain areas and what had happened, graphics could be used as well, try the shock Skullie

approach like with drink driving with pictures of blue limp bodies being picked out of an avalanche.

I've not done any avalanche training or real off piste, but from what has been written here i dug a hole on the side of the piste one day over x-mas while waiting for others to catch up, i'd never done this before but i was shocked to find a really hard top layer and then about 10-15cm of really loose granular snow (a bit like polystyrene balls) that no matter what i did, it wouldn't stick together. The rest of the group were quite shocked as well, i guess we all assumed the snow all stuck together.

The avalanche warning of 1-5 is needed but means jack all to the vast majority of sliders out there - no one ever explains what it is & what it actually means. And as others have pointed out on this forum, you only have to be slightly off the main pistes to end up becoming one of the causalties of the avalanche statistics. Until people know someone who was involved or see what an avalanche can do, i think the vast majority of sliders will continue in their ignorance. Snow is this lovely white fluffy stuff - how can it hurt me...................i don't think people really appreaciate how unstable it is, after all it's only snow.........isn't it rolling eyes

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

If you go sailing and you don't check weather bulletins, you're an idiot. If you go off-piste skiing and you don't check avalanche bulletins (and educate yourself with a rudimentary knowledge of what they mean) you're an idiot.

Ski resorts shouldn't have to invest huge sums in placing signs left, right and centre. The information is centrally available, usually on the window of the tourist office/ski school/ski guides' centre.

Some resorts have invested in electronic signs, flashing avalanche beacons etc. at various strategic lift stations. Excellent customer service, and a final warning to those fools who will ignore them.

A snowHead

A snowHead

David Goldsmith, I am sorry but I guess this is where I get involved with my first "fight" wink

I find your comments nieve and unhelpful. Even the resorts acknowledge the need to educate their customers more.

To an experienced off piste skier, checking avalanche risk is second nature. But how did we know about it? I bet it wasn't common sence. I bet somebody told you about what to do. i bet somebody told you how to interpret the information. Checking avalanche information isn't as logical as you make out. Many people go off piste on the spur of the moment when they see loads of others doing it on the assumption that if others are doing it, it must be OK. How is the average skier meant to know better. I bet that if you did a survey of skiers only a small minority would know that there were daily avalanche reports, even less would know where to find them and less still would know what they meant.

Secondly, resorts do have a big responsibility that they are only just beginning to live up to and are a long way from getting it right. After all, it is the resorts who put in the lifts that allow easy access to this stuff. And more and more we see lifts whose primary function is to serve well known routes. For example, Val D'Isere installed a new fast quad up to the start of the "Tour de Charvet". This has increased the numbers skiing it while the pisted route has barely increased its traffic because its cold and north facing. If you make dangerous stuff more accessable, you need to increase the warnings.

Finally, you use the example of sailing and weather forecasts. These are widely available, far more so than avalanche information. Basic weather info is on after every newscast and on the radio regularly. Forecasts are posted everywhere and there are all sorts of easily accessed services for getting more detailed info. If we got to that point with avalanche details, the mountains would have less accident.

You state that ski resorts shouldn't have to invest huge sums. Then who should? What is going on isn't working so something needs to be done before central government interfere. Education is, IMO, the only answer but who will pay? Surely the resorts are exactly the right people to be investing in this for they are the ones who ultimately pay for rescues etc.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Lincolnshire police have invested in roads signs that signal how many deaths/serious injuries have occurred so far that year. it certainly makes you think when you see the harsh figures. Maybe a sign saying "x number of people caught in avalances so far this year" would make people think.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

SimonN, I'm afraid that any skier who somehow doesn't hear avalanche blasting, doesn't see the avalanche warnings on the signboards at lift stations, doesn't see previous avalanches around the mountainside (there are invariably a few as visual clues to the level of danger) should stay on piste, hire a guide or learn about the activity they pay (a small fortune) to take part in.

People don't have to be spoonfed about all aspects of their ski education at all times in all locations. The fact that a resort provides a lift which serves an off-piste area is not a reason to ski it. There's always the alternative piste to go down.

It's ludicrous to suppose that there are skiers around who are not aware of the risk of avalanches and the annual death toll. Fresh snowfall accentuates avalanche risk, wind accentuates avalanche risk, rising temps accentuate avalanche risk. The avalanche risk is always posted up or available with a simple enquiry. It's like A-B-C.

Maybe people want to be radio-controlled, like part-robots, so there's always someone else carrying the responsibility.

You'll need to Register first of course.

David Goldsmith, my approach would be that if there are but a few lives saved, it's worth it. We are simply talking about better ways of raising awareness here. We have a system in place - but all systems can be improved. I propose that the current signage is inadequate. Improving people's understanding in no way equates to spoonfeeding them.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

After all it is free

David, I think that you are falling into the trap of assuming that most other piste users have your level of experience and have come from the same skiing culture (by which I mean starting ages ago, on what would today be considered to be bad equipment and without "lifestyle advertising" making it cool to be "extreme". you have therefore learned to respect the mountains).

People coming into the sport these days are bombarded with the idea that powder is the ultimate goal and that it should be accessible to all (and with modern equipment, that is almost the case). Lifestyle advertising makes people think that they need to be making fresh tracks as much as possible and that they are in a video with a heavy metal soundtrack rather than being in a dangerous environment.

In Tignes last week I was amazed at the number of people throwing themselves off-piste as soon as the snow arrived. Even before the really big snowfalls, it was obvious that the two main dangers were avalanche due to fresh snow on a non-existent base and hidden rocks that had inadequate cover.

I agree that you cannot nanny everyone and the mountains are a place for self reliance, but I think that the ski industry is occasionally guilty of promoting an image that encourages people to be irresponsible. As a result, I agree with PG that you probably need more than the current system of a flag flying at lifts and a few signs that are only read by the people that know it anyway.

How about having the Risk Number displayed at the bottom of every lift? Certainly there are areas I've been to where I've never seen the risk displayed anywhere, presumably it has been but it is far from obvious, and in a big area with lots of lifts not everyone is necessarily going to see the one flag outside the big cablecar or whatever. Having said that, I've done the Tour de Charvet at VdI a few times, and like the Cugnai and other easily accessible off-piste runs, there have always been dire warnings about avalanches/cliffs etc so the distinction between piste and off-piste is obvious.

And I tend to agree with David Goldsmith, in this day and age all it takes is 5min reading the piste map, or 5min on Google, or 5min on a forum like this, or 5min speaking to any experienced skier, and any total novice skier will become aware of the danger of avalanches. Surely anyone who starts something new attempts to educate himself about what he's getting into?

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Help!!

Avalanches claim victims in the Savoie

snowHeads Forum Index >>> snowNews