One is out presumably for purposes of mitigation. The other has clients to keep safe. Stupid comparison.
Printable View
One is out presumably for purposes of mitigation. The other has clients to keep safe. Stupid comparison.
Guided operations perform mitigation work all the time. Some even have permits to use explosives (I don't know if PA does or not). The role of both is to keep clients safe.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcski
Since I'm stupid, perhaps you could lay out the differences in a bit more detail. Thanks.
The news stated he was a photog attached to a client group. That's the issueQuote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
Do you know specifically how his general role as a photographer for the company affected the chain of events and outcome of this accident?Quote:
Originally Posted by mcski
Irrelevant.
I think it's a difference in the terrain they're operating in. In bounds has been patrolled and blasted heavily. It doesn't have the chance to build up to create the level of slides happening right now. Some backcountry operations might do mitigation but I doubt it's on the same level as a resort. Either way I'm not passing judgement against the operators but I don't think its fare to compare the two.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
Link please. Not saying you are wrong, but the deceased was absolutely trained and employed as a guide.Quote:
The news stated he was a photog attached to a client group
I'm not sure that it is tremendously relevant but given that A Basin elected not to open yesterday due to avalanche hazard I'd say there are certainly parallels between patrol/guides and ski areas/guides operations.
On a level 5 day, when cars are being buried on the interstate and mature trees are being knocked down there is no such thing as a safe zone
Im not saying being a photog is the issue. The issue is they are out for the purpose of escorting clients around, not doing avy mitigation. The issue people have is why would anyone take clients out w the current snowpack issues into what was an exposed situation. It would seem that they should have taken the terrain above them into account as well as the slope they were on. The issue is the guiding clients part if that wasn't clear
In his blog Al said that decision was based on the threat from the professor and widow maker.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles
“We do have teams working on the mountain. The Ski Patrollers are running their avalanche routes. The Lift Crew is digging out the chairlifts and getting them going. Snow plows and snowcats are trying to keep travel lanes open.“
Edit: I’m not saying there aren’t parallels either. Both are dangerous but being out of bounds operating on an extreme day with the activity we’re seeing is in my opinion another level.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcski
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
Make up your mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcski
Here is my point. There are a bunch of people talking out of their ass and victim blaming. I expect that from Facebook but usually Slide Zone is better than that.
Unless you were there, or spoke directly to someone that was, you don't know exactly what went down. There are very few details that are available publicly at this point. What we do know is that a very large avalanche ran to historic extents and a guide was killed. According to the operating company, this slide was triggered by a different party.
I do know someone that was there and I don't know exactly what went down, because it ain't the time to ask. Because he is busy mourning one of his best friends.
IF YOU KNOW FACTS about this or any other accident... they are useful to help everyone learn from. Stating unsubstantiated bullshit serves only to stoke ones own ego and discount the decision making of others to the point where you have closed yourself off from learning anything useful.
OK, now we are getting somewhere. But once again I will ask, please, in detail, the difference in your mind between working terrain in order to make it "safe" for clients to ski, and "guiding" clients to "safe" skiing. I have skied many times in ski areas where ski patrollers directed me exactly where to ski.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcski
I think this is a fair point, although I would ask if you know what level of avalanche mitigation PA does relative to nearby ski areas? I do not and so don't feel comfortable making judgments on what they do and don't do.Quote:
Originally Posted by ffmedic84
To clarify, the accident location on Jones Pass is in the Front Range zone, which was rated at High (level 4 of 5) yesterday. The adjacent Vail/Summit zone was rated Extreme (level 5 of 5).Quote:
Originally Posted by old goat
With that, I'll be signing off TGR and other social media for a bit. Stay safe, make good decisions.
Quote:
The news stated he was a photog attached to a client group. That's the issue
Quote:
Irrelevant.
It wasn't clear but not it is. Thanks still waiting for that news link.Quote:
The issue is the guiding clients part if that wasn't clear
To give my answer on Adrenelated's question, I think ski areas feel comfortable that they can open large amounts of terrain without exposing themselves to the avalanche hazard. In addition to that, they may or may not have opened terrain yesterday in avalanche terrain based on their analysis of the risk.
I think that use computer jockeys with no life on a Friday night would respond a bit differently. The terrain that the incident occurred in is, most likely, true backcountry absent any type of control work or meaningful skier compaction. Most people would agree that avalanche terrain in the backcountry was unsafe yesterday. You would be unlikely to be able to make this blanket statement about avalanche terrain in proximate ski areas as that terrain would have be subject to, most likely, control work and previous skier compaction.
Ok it has been a long day of processing this tragedy. I hope everyone can heal from this. Save the QB analysis for Monday. A good man died doing his job. R.I.P Hans - wildisreal
Sorry, I don’t see the parallel either. If that was a ski resort the entire methodology of operations would have been completely different (continuous active control of a major slide path vs skiing well below an uncontrolled major slide path).Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
Not saying I would have made a different decision (though I can’t remember ever skiing below major slide paths on extreme danger days), but I don’t see the parallel.
Having been both a helicopter skiing guide and a professional ski patroller, I would say they are not at all similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
This indicates the victim was dropped off further down to set up for photos before the cat continued up where skiers would drop in.
https://www.denverpost.com/2019/03/0...GLDdPQ2zBaK_yI
His point isn't that hard to decipher.
Guides and Trollers both:
Are paid to be there
Are looking out for their guests
Are under pressure to get guests on snow asap
Make mistakes
With that, how about drop that tangent since this is a rip thread? Debate nuances of the two elsewhere?
__
Vibes to friends and fam of the fallen.
Sorry, I have a hard time accepting this point of view. Certainly people with experience at Jones Pass (or anywhere with similar loading and orographic characteristics) would consider that region to be Extreme in such circumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
Are you familiar with PA's methodology of operations? I am not, at least not to the extent that I can compare or contrast it with that of anywhere else. Again, my point here is we (as a community) need to stop talking out of our asses and stick to what we know as true, which brings me to your second post:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
This is not a point of view. It is a fact that the published avalanche danger rating by the CAIC was High for the Front Range zone, not Extreme. If you would like to debate whether or not that was the correct rating, or whether or not it is even relevant to this avalanche accident, I think that is fair. I have my own opinions on that, which I have not expressed in this thread or anywhere else so I'm not sure how you would know what they are. However, let's get our facts correct. The rated avalanche danger where this accident occurred was High, not Extreme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
I would be interested to hear you elaborate on this. A separate thread or a PM would be fine and probably more appropriate,Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kanone
Thanks, I had not seen this article and these details.Quote:
Originally Posted by FiveLarge
This is such a bad situation. I thought the rating was extreme throughout the region. It was on the 7th which I thought was the date.
Once again, let's be sure that we are stating facts that are accurate and true. CAIC went to a ten zone forecast system in 2006. Thursday was the first time that four zones (not five) were rated at Extreme since the ten zone format began.Quote:
Originally Posted by daviski
I'm not debating that conditions were exceptionally dangerous on Thursday. However I am going to hold this community to a standard of not posting things that are verifiably false.
Attachment 273177
EDIT: I see your post has been edited thusly:
Here is the forecast for the Front Range zone on Thursday, March 7, 2019:Quote:
Originally Posted by daviski
Attachment 273178
What happens with the unguided skiers who triggered this?
that is uncertain too
adrenalated I see you are correct on that point and it does matter. I don't know the people but love the area, sympathy to everyone involved or close to them. Very sorry
Why is there hang up in this discussion of whether the forecast was high or extreme for the zone that this occurred? It was only a forecast. Reading the forecast discussion, the comment about the steamboat area indicates less “extreme” conditions and forecast. This makes me wonder if the High rating was because caic needed to consider that area in its overall single word rating for the zone:
https://avalanche.state.co.us/foreca...e/front-range/
RIP to family and friends.
Talk about pendantic. I get that you’re close to this, and I’m sorry for your (and others’) loss, but come on now. The methodologies of ski patrolling and ski guiding at Jones Pass are nowhere near similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
True. ‘accepting this as a point of view’ -> ‘accepting this as part of any argument’.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
C'mon man, I know you, skied with you and Lindhal, and the OP, and most deeply feel for your loss. We have been there with more dead people then we should have, but ...Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
This was a major fuck up. Unfortunately 2 commercial operations in Colorado this year so far.
If you can't see this as a major fucking fuck up, then you definitely need to hit that guitar a bit harder.
No one, don't doubt our forecast, or if your were remotely out there, would know, it's a clean your fucking bathroom day. Simple as that.
This disgusts me.
Edit:
My 25 year old self wanted deeply to deposit myself on top of the most avalanche prone terrain yesterday and use my well overfunded brain to illustrate in rebellion the fact that I could navigate it selfishly. Fully knowing that I could.
But, my 43 year old self said that was owed a douche slap for being so stupid. And I replied, I'm not being stupid, I proving smarts. To which my other self said...
Exactly, stupid. I was so close so close, but those 20 years, and deaths, made me clean the kitchen to take out my itch.
Food for thought.
While danger was 4/4/3 for the zone, it was under an avalanche warning noting "exceptional avalanche conditions" and the avalanche problem indicated "likely" slab avalanches of "very large to historic" size. There were many recent historic slides in that zone.
What is more, that drainage is a particularly deep area of a very large forecast zone and sits on the continental divide; it is extremely close to the zone border over which the forecast was 5/5/5. We always tell our intro students to read the neighboring zone forecast when *close* to the zone border.
Historic conditions like that prudently dictate either operational hold or taking your clients to 25deg terrain that has zero exposure from above.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAIC Front Range Zone Forecast Discussion 3/7/19
True safe zones during historic conditions are areas where you are not on, connected to, or underneath (within the max alpha angle) of any potential slide zone based on conservative start zone slope angles of 27/28deg.
Bad luck is when you make good decisions but have a bad outcome. Bad luck is the rarest type of avalanche accident. This accident was not bad luck. Where the guide was hit, where was snowcat moments before according to the news, were objectively not safe places to be that day. The evidence is in the pile of pulverized timber and the tragic loss of life.
I've dug pits in the low fun zone (35 before the fun) where the entire slope has collapsed and was shivering getting out of the pit;
I've set off complete hudge acres of terrain at 22 degrees remotely and had the same feeling. Litteraly entire fields of gone.
A stomp and a hand pit is not going to get you your normal tomorrow.
Just wait a week. And then tempt. It's not easy, this science, but that buffer, can save your life.
Edit: I know we are being nanny's but we're in our age and this shit can save your life, as much as you want those over the head 'grams.
Here's a try: find some underservered liftserved inbounds and post that faceshot as a stach that you nailed and get some $$$ from the hill.
Quite honestestly: I've gone through the spectrum of being scared of not knowing and running it, through the final end of knowing too much and thinking I know too much. It's a very weird feeling that I don't know too many people to talk to about. But it is a very relevant discussion perhaps for another thread.
There is a reason avi professionals die. I have overcome the starter one's but I'm solidly in the cohort of thinking too much and being the next one. I'm aware of this. It scares me in a way that I'm uncomfortable about it.
I've dug pits in the low fun zone (35 before the fun) where the entire slope has collapsed and was shivering getting out of the pit;
I've set off complete hudge acres of terrain at 22 degrees remotely and had the same feeling. Litteraly entire fields of gone.
A stomp and a hand pit is not going to get you your normal tomorrow.
Just wait a week. And then tempt. It's not easy, this science, but that buffer, can save your life.
The whole assessment game is totally crazy, and when you bring other people into the equation, it's down right mad.
That is my conclusion.
There is lots of good discussion points in this thread. Often good talking points don't blend well with current tragedy.
Even the best of us make bad decisions, despite knowing what we should know. For better or for worse....Most of the time we get away with it.
I often lament about how something that can bring such happiness, joy, stoke and friendship can also be so devastating.
Vibes to family and friends.
Well said. Emotions are running high. I'm guilty of hammering on the keyboard hoping that is therapeutic. It doesn't work.Quote:
I often lament about how something that can bring such happiness, joy, stoke and friendship can also be so devastating.
I know many of you and you tend to be smart, caring people. Let's collectively try and be a bit more compassionate. The arguing bullshit is tiring. That said, there is a lot I can personally learn from even those that I disagree with. It is a hard balance to find between discussing and E fighting.
I'm going skiing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmcrawfo
C'est la vie.
Keep critical, keep aware, and keep skiing. ++Vibes to all.
Wonder if this is still going on...
https://www.facebook.com/events/224447898471167/
Colorado Backcountry Workshop 2019
Hosted by Powder Addiction and Colorado Backcountry Workshop
Mar 7 at 6 PM – Mar 10 at 4 PM
The Colorado Backcountry Workshop is an event designed to focus on the human factors associated with backcountry skiing and riding. Cost = $500
The main organizers are:
Eric Tollund, Ski Guide, Snow Safety Co-director, Powder Addiction Cat Skiing
Bjørn Michaelsen, Norwegian Avalanche Educator, Forecaster
Fred Buttard, IFMGA, French Mountain Guide, Owner Up Ski & Mountain Guides
Not intended as any kind of a joke. But the company posted on FB what I was replying to, that another group started the whole thing above their guided group. So my (very serious) question is, should the other group that started the slide be identified, would charges be filed of involuntary manslaughter. If the deceased was my friend or family, I would be pretty angry at what I perceive to be very irresponsible behavior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit
So, even if the company is being questioned for having clients out on a day like that, another party acted poorly above their "safe zone" and their actions led directly to a loss of life.
Your not in a safe zone if you're under a steep slope.
Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk
I was working Clear Creek Dispatch Thursday. P/A contacted us by radio, and we got people rolling. I won't go into very much detail, but these calls always leave an impression, and tax my tiny brain for months while I try to process what went wrong/how this could have been avoided? I did the same after Sheep Creek, although I wasn't on console that day.
Some good insights being posted here. I can only say that P/A were for the most part self-sufficient in recovering the victim and getting him out to medics. It's a weird feeling, getting these calls. Although I've pretty much sworn of BC in recent years, I'm at least a little bit familiar with BC travel/safety. Time seems to slow way down from the time the call comes in until a responder makes contact and we start to get a clearer picture of the situation and potential outcome. I sit, I hope, I even pray. I imagine the terror the victim might have experienced as they're caught and carried, maybe praying themselves for it to just stop. Maybe they've got an air pocket, maybe they're still viable. Maybe that's just projection.
I saw the coroner page a few hours after my shift ended, and knew the outcome then, although I had already heard from several on scene that prospects weren't great. I read the fb post from one of the guests, the post by P/A, read all the comments there and here. Not my place to question decisions, just to try and facilitate the best possible outcome once we've gotten involved, but the impacts as some others have mentioned can be far reaching. It's times like these I'm thankful that the greatest risk in my occupation is paper cuts and losing it with difficult callers/responders.
Condolences to all.
Are you fucking Drunk?Quote:
Originally Posted by SterlingSpikeDancer
Ruining the life of someone else isnt going to bring resolve, no matter how angry you may be.
Managing risk in the back country includes variables like other groups, particularity in a professional context.
Besides, its a small world. The guy you want charged with manslaughter today could be the guy diggin you tomorrow. We are all knowingly and willingly participating in one of the most dangerous recreational actives possible.
In France they do prosecute people that drop slides on other people. But if you get buried by a slide someone else triggered you would also have been buried if you remote triggered it or by a natural. Seems to me that there's responsibility at both ends-- not to trigger a slide on someone but also not to park yourself in the run out zone.
It's worth pointing out that if you get buried on a day where the whole area is a bomb waiting to go off you are risking the lives of a whole lot of SAR folks.
my guess would be for the same reason the 100 people were at alta/bird the day Jamie Pierre died and the whole mountain was coming ungluedQuote:
Originally Posted by skideeppow
and they kept skiing and setting off slides on top of each other.
but im not a professional
probably shouda evacutated and closed the state if the entire state was an unsafe zoneQuote:
Originally Posted by old goat
and you do know the majority of sar is voli
and everyone ive met knows exactly what they are volunteering for
so the putting people who volunteered to be at risk
at risk
maybe isn't the crime you seem to think it is
ill let the rest of you get back to patting yourselves on the back for managing your addictions for another day of life
in a thread where its questionable as to whether it belongs at all
kudos