nor are explosives the litmus test in avalanche assessment....Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Dog
Printable View
nor are explosives the litmus test in avalanche assessment....Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Dog
Even more interesting was that that concern was solicited by me initially upon asking, "So how do you feel about it?" and then, offering a very non-threatening, "You do not have to ski it if you are uncomfortable, you can go back down the skin track and we'll meet up in a bit." What about the douche (joking) who initiated the RB2 and partook in the ice crust potato chip fest? I don't mean to single out folks either, but you have to admit, it was one of the most interesting human factors plays in my recent memory.Quote:
Originally Posted by pechelman
Hey Snow Dog, very nicely put. The question of "Did we make the right decision?" will always play out if the slope does not slide... only when it does is there a definitive answer. If if you ski it and it does not slide the question remains "did we miss the sweet spot?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Dog
I completely agree with your question "are we being too cautious?" thought... that depends on who you are making decisions for: your self and friends with similar risk tolerances or the general public driving a highway with no clue they are even in the mountains? The decisions must take into account the risk acceptance level of the group.
I love the contributions from the well thought out business models out there, decision making in groups is similar in so many risky situations and the business models proposed are much more articulate and easy to understand than my original ramblings!!! Thanks for consolidating my thoughts!
Apparently not everyone is aware of that, as evidenced by the woman on the chair lift the other day who asked if my probe was explosives (slow pitch, but true).Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Dog
I wondered about what went on with you guys out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark
This post and your earlier one bring up some interesting points. Makes me wonder about the issue of making a solo decision amidst a group dynamic. I.e., "I'm going to ski this, you don't have to if you don't want". How does the rest of the group handle that? How acceptable is it to make individual decisions in the group dynamic? And then there's the issue of people being "shamed" into maybe skiing something they aren't comfortable, when their only option is to turn around and descend the skin track while others ski the pow (when what they really wanted was for everyone to turn around).
Not intending to criticize any decisions, just noting some more group dynamic issues highlighted by what you just described.
That was one of my original points. It takes balls to fight getting sucked into bad human factor decisions, especially when they can compound the danger. I've backed away from lines when the group en toto was not in consensus, and I've made a decision to not personally go when the group did not agree with my assessment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
Not to single you out, this is just evidence that folks on this board actually do ski together, remember a couple of years ago when you set a skin track I didn't agree with? Pretty much everyone else followed you, but I didn't, and followed a different, and more strenuous skin track because I personally didn't feel comfortable with your decision. Did your route slide, no. Was I going to take it, no. I had to follow my own assessment on that one, and sometimes that doesn't make everyone feel good, but it matters.
This is a great thread.
I think this goes back to exactly what tarkman was referring toQuote:
Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark
If you head up a slope and at the top your only options areQuote:
For some reason, I never hear too much about 'painting yourself into a box' where all the options that you have are bad.
(a) ski a rad line with stability that is not necessarily obvious red light conditions but more "yellow" than you'd prefer
(b) go back down the skin track
What are too many people going to do and eventually get bit doing? Hint it's not (b) ;). I'm not passing any judgement on whether the line you guys skied was or was not safe but given those options it sounds like you might be pushed to ski a line you and or your group had 2nd thoughts about.
I think one of the most important pre-trip planning exercises you can have is leave yourself with other fun less risky options (that's my contripution to the OP). Fun being a key word there. And realize ahead of time that you could run into "yellow " conditions and what your going to do about them.
Please don't take any offense I used your situation as an example, I fully acknowledge I am unaware of the full situation but I think my point is the same. I speak from experience when I say that "painting yourself in a box" frequently leads to bad decisions and we've all gotten away with plenty in life and the mountains, but that streak will only last so long.
Just to clarify, I was comfortable skiing the slope and it was my impression that others in the group were less comfortable, or did not possess enough information to make as informed of a decision as I made.Quote:
Originally Posted by madturtle
This brings out another small point as well: these types of situations usually only come up in as you describe yellow, to high yellow scenarios, which exacerbate the effects of human factors. When it's all green/go, there may be human factors involved, but they don't necessarily manifest themselves in a dangerous situation.
I strongly concur with your "painting yourself into a box" observation, and like I have always said, you must always have a backup plan and be prepared to take it, no matter how much it hurts that other human factor - ego.
And just as an FYI, I stood in that very same pit almost a year ago to that day, and backed down from that very line.
Another small point: Isn't it interesting to note how many, if not most, human factors are eliminated when skiing solo? Sure, expert halo, previous experience on slope, powder fever still exist, but it is really the combination of multiple people that kicks all the factors effects up exponentially.
I do remember that skin track, and you're right, sometimes you have to follow what your own internal compass tells you. Figuring out how that will play out in a group dynamic is the tricky part.Quote:
Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark
It's also useful to think about these situations from all perspectives. There's the perspective of the person who thinks it is safe and says "I am going to do this" outside of any consensus (or thinks it is unsafe and says "I am not going to do this" outside of any consensus). Then there is the perspective of the person trying to process their own actions within a group dynamic, and having to act within that dynamic when someone else has made a more individual decision.
I think that once you choose to engage in a group activity, you really stop making "individual decisions." It's worth remembering that if you choose to ski a marginal line and it goes, well, your pals are now out there trying to dig you out, and potentially exposing themselves to immediate risk (from further avalanche activity) and (at risk of sounding like a flake) the possible emotional trauma of a failed rescue attempt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
I think it really does come down to group size and how pre-go decisions have been agreed to be made. If it's one person verses 4 that doesn't feel comfortable, that person should take the skin track down. No one should ever be pressured to ski a line they aren't comfortable with especially when a safe alternative exists (provided that has been prepared ahead of time). When it's one person saying go, versus 4 saying no, then you can only do your best to voice your concerns, make your choice to back off, and unfortunately hope that person isn't so selfish or stupid to ski a line solo which could involve the rest of the group initiating a rescue.
Like I said earlier, the numbers really affect the effects of human factors, which is why I think we all agree, more than 3 folks on the ground does not help in any smart decision making in the backcountry, but actually confounds it.
Interesting that you mention not having enough info. Do you remember 2 years ago, probably in that same spot or nearby, we dug a pit and the snow was as solid as could be, I braced my legs and was pushing on the column and couldn't get the column to move (no, this is not a new shear test, I was just fucking around). Later, other members of our party who were not there to analyze the pit found themselves on the slope, and were extremely hesitant to ski it despite our protestations that it was rock solid.Quote:
Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark
One of the difficulties in digging pits where it would not be safe to have the whole party out there at the pit. Those who don't get to see firsthand may not have the info that they need to feel comfortable.
Some great stuff here. This is one of the better, more useful threads I've seen here in quite a while.
Here's my .02: Regardless of all else I continually remind myself throughout a BC tour that I am walking amongst indiscriminate killers. As long as I have that thought floating around I can hopefully maintain a conservative approach and avoid some of the pitfalls that lead to accidents (mad pow disease).
Yup, even without the boobs. Thanks to skibee for getting this one going.Quote:
Originally Posted by bones get broke
Love the 'mad pow disease' line by the way. Can I use that?
I am really enjoying the armchair entertainment of reading the discussion of a particular decision made (or not made) once. I would love to read a blow by blow on the decision... did it slide, how was the skiing? How did the group feel afterwards? Will you ever ski together again?
Geez that sounds like a sound bite from a soap opera...
Tune in next week when you will hear Nanoski ;) say "I don't like the feel of the snow!"
What will be the response of the group, will Nanoski;) have to buy beer, will there be an avalanche, who is having Nanoski's;) baby???
All I'm saying is what a great real life interaction that demonstrates how a group makes a decision and continues to analysis it many moons later.
Even if the slope didn't slide... was it stable? How can we ever tell?
schrodinger's catQuote:
Originally Posted by skibee
Have at it matey, I heard it somewhere else anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by srsosbso
Then I posted it here and effectively stole it. That is a pretty complex decision unto itself. Stealing someone elses line......I knew it was wrong, I did it anyway ;).
Don't be silly. Cats don't ski backcountry.Quote:
Originally Posted by mntlion
Yes but just because it is in the box is it dead or alive... just because we skied it was it stable.
All I can say is that if we had anouther cat we could try an experiment!!!
Or the Heisenberg Principle of Uncertainty.Quote:
Originally Posted by mntlion
As soon as you ski the slope you've changed it's potential behavior.
With or without a cat.
You are the cat and the avalanche is the radioactive nucleus.
Does anyone have any experience with the Avaluator? It is an attempt at taking some of the wishful thinking out of the decision making process by going through a checklist. If you go to the link you will see that the CAC has given avalanche terrain complexities ratings for many common trips in Western Canada. The forecast with the terrain gives a pre trip estimate of the hazard which is then modified by field observations. The difficulty is then convincing the group that a piece of cardboard is telling you not to ski that slope.
The motivation behind it was stories like that of A Dozen More Turns where all the signs of danger were there but a knowledgeable and experienced group somehow didn't put the pieces together.
Tossing a cat on the slope changes it too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tye 1on
I was thinking: Skibee's Avalanche Uncertainty. You can never be sure of the stability of the slope.
Even skiing a slope doesn't guarantee that it's stable.
Mntlion, yet another reason for getting the second cat... a spare if we need to asses a slope!!!
I think I need the "get drunk and post as much as you can" thread right now!!!
As for the SAU: either be cautious and go fer coffee or just ski it SFD (straight f*cking down)
I hope I'm never faced with having to go on my own to play it safe and have the remainder of the group involved in an accident.
All the gear, no idea. You see these types getting into scrapes so often...Quote:
Originally Posted by RockBoy
A great initial post, and a really thought provoking thread.
i agree it was an interesting situation wrt human factor, but i think you might be reading a bit much into our seeming complacency.Quote:
Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark
Bryan, who wasnt in that pit to start, had just dug one right before and was skiing all morning so he had some familiarity with the snow. He then joined you at the end and came to the same conclusion i did, on my own, that the new snow lacked the cohesion to slide.
Dave was in there for a second to see the rain layer and I think inspect the shear quality and new snow cohesion, and of course helped with the RB.
Everyone else was in the pit.
as for myself, i was an observer of the tests. I also didnt feel it was a good idea to get a 4th or 5th person into that small pit on that slope in such a small area and instead hung out by that large tree about 10ft away. I did not disagree with anything i saw vs what i heard as far as assesment, except for a conservatively false statement that it would slide. I wasnt so sure that it would, but i have no problem with being conservative so I said nothing. Right after you dropped in, Bryan and I were talking to S about her concerns and what our individual thoughts were.
I guess one of the lessons, or maybe what im trying to hint at with my seeming complacency, id take away from all this, especially in a group that large, is that too many cooks can ruin a recipe, and that if theyre all following the recipe, its ok to say nothing, but when someone reaches for the anchovy paste in the chocolate cake recipe, its a good time to speak up. Im generally a quiet person, but im most definitely not shy and will speak up when something is wrong.
I guess this boils right into another human factor in knowing your partners and how they react and understanding those reactions.
I will say one thing I disagreed with, after the fact, due to how quickly it all happened, was that we didnt discuss a plan as to what we were all going to do, should the slope not have ripped out on Dobish's ski cut. The decision was made very quickly and somewhat independently by him to proceed farther down. I dont disagree with his decision, just the fact we didnt cover all our bases before he was sent out.
anyway
this is interesting
i also think it was helpful to type this out
I will add that I have enjoyed this discussion and coming out into the cirque after skiing Boner City was eye opening (seeing that most of the other lines had ripped out). But we have had the experience of seeing how Boner City sets up--protected from the wind, deeper pack, not as many rocks for starting zones, etc.
The snowpack that day was junk, but lacked any energy to move should a trigger stressed it to a breaking point.
Perhaps a bit off topic, but in my opinion,Quote:
Originally Posted by skibee
things in BC are not going to settle down
until after the snow melts in the summer.
There is a bad layer, and it is the bottom layer.
Perhaps it could cure itself, but at the moment, I doubt it.
It did warm up where I am for a couple days,
snow consolidated into a crusty hard frozen layer,
but it did not penetrate to the bottom layer.
As for the rest of the thread, I often take the hit for saying no.
Call me chicken if you must.
McCammon has a followup study where he adds 2 more heuristic traps, the "Expert Halo" (the tendency for a party to defer to the judgment of a group leader, whether the leader is making good decisions or not) alluded to in liquidchaos' second post, and the "Social Acceptance" heuristic (the tendency to engage in activities that we think will get us noticed or accepted by people we like or respect, or by people who we want to like or respect us.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tye 1on
IMO the Social Acceptance heuristic takes on increased importance in these days of posted TRs and TGR cred. And McCammon's Social Acceptance data seems to actually belie the Mixed Gender hypothesis skibee mentions in her original post - it appears that males in the presence of females tend to take greater risks, and are less likely to be reined in by their female counterparts (snoboy mentions this as well).
Part of making good decisions is knowing how you come at them, and understanding the underlying heuristics that get you there. When we better recognize some of the shortcuts and/or fallacies that color our decisionmaking process, we can (hopefully) make more rational decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by tarkman1
Although I know of at least one very sage avy expert who less inclined to believe in "heuristic traps", I tend to be an adherent of McCammon's concepts, though aspects of his research can remain arguable. I think that for those who have avalanche awareness training, the important next step is to understand how we can best use our training and not let it be overridden by such heuristic traps.
For sure - Human factors play a huge role.
The best advice I ever got given is that safe mountain travel comes down to 3 factors....
1. Snow
2. Terrain
3. & (perhaps most importantly!) People.
The people factor includes a whole load of subtle stuff.
Group dynamics, communication, sensible decision making, attitude to risk and also being properly equiped... amongst others.
Ideally you (obviously) want to get all 3 factors correct.
However in most accidents usually 2 or more out of the 3 factors are wrong ?
bump for the new year...