To say anything or not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skaredshtles

And the Sheep Creek incident... that one was really sobering.

---

This.

You already said the snowpack was stable on that slope, so at best you were "informing them of best practices". Would you have done the same thing if the guide was an old guy? I ski with some young female guides. They tell me they get mansplained by "well meaning" old guys like you all the time. What does your female guide friend from the same company think of your butting in on the field day and then following up with the boss? Seems like straight up Karen shit to me, but I'll defer to your female friend for the final determination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

. Would you have done the same thing if the guide was an old guy? .

---

Without a doubt. In fact, I’d feel more comfortable approaching some crusty old dude than I would a young female guide for this very reason.

I already said that part of my hesitation was due to not wanting to seem like I was mansplaining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

You already said the snowpack was stable on that slope, so at best you were "informing them of best practices".

---

Read where myself and others have already addressed this.

THEN type.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

Seems like straight up Karen shit to me, but I'll defer to your female friend for the final determination.

---

Oh I’m so glad you’ll defer to the senior guide with knowledge of the area when you’re clearly the expert.

Please read above where I said she went out to the area today and agreed they took unnecessary risks. Then type.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

mansplaining trolling karen trolling safe is safe trolling

---

Avalanche don't care if you got a dick or a vag.
Avalanche don't know you are an expert.
Guides aren't gods.
San Juan continental persistent slab problems are happy to remote trigger.
Low risk is not no risk. Moderate risk is not low risk. The problem might be there... the obvious avalanche path says the dragon visits on the regular... how many people to wager at once on that bet when modeling behavior?
Expose one person at a time and no picnicking in the runout.
Take the trolling to the main forum.

Yes. thanks summit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tech Tonics

I did indeed say something.

---

Glad to hear this turned out so positive. Tough situation, but good on you for saying something. Feelings have to be set aside when dealing with life and death situations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

You already said the snowpack was stable on that slope, so at best you were "informing them of best practices". Would you have done the same thing if the guide was an old guy? I ski with some young female guides. They tell me they get mansplained by "well meaning" old guys like you all the time. What does your female guide friend from the same company think of your butting in on the field day and then following up with the boss? Seems like straight up Karen shit to me, but I'll defer to your female friend for the final determination.

---

reading comprehension fail and dick punches for you bud

Tech Tonic nice work in taking the time to ask the important and difficult questions in a spirit of inquiry. I don't always have the patience to do that and it backfires on me.

We had a good friend who died in the La Traviata slide near Revelstoke. The assistant guide was uncomfortable but didn't say anything to the head guide/owner. Seven people died. And it just about broke the assistant guide emotionally--as I recall from his book he left the profession.

I stand corrected. You guys are heroes. Don't change a thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

I stand corrected. You guys are heroes. Don't change a thing.

---

I'm with you bro
sick of everyone trying to one up each other and point out how you are doing it wrong
"just trying to save a life brah"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fastfred

I'm with you bro
sick of everyone trying to one up each other and point out how you are doing it wrong
"just trying to save a life brah"

---

Woah. This is so Punk, it sounds better on vinyl.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

I stand corrected. You guys are heroes. Don't change a thing.

---

I’m glad the collective put you on notice for your bullshit post. I came back to it multiple times and could not put together a cogent reply but collective came through. Cheers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by east or bust

reading comprehension fail and dick punches for you bud

---

This reply was perfect.

I wonder if wapow even read the thread, or if he just sprayed garbage to make himself feel smart

Just ignore them. Some people are not worth the trouble.

It seems like the kind of situation where guidance could be implied, rather than told.

Ask them if they know if a skin track has been put in in the trees that everyone skis. Ask them if they've heard any reports about when the last time the exposed gully slid. Etc. Imply that the direction they appear to be heading is dumb without actually telling them it's dumb. Which also opens the door for them to give you useful information, in the event that they know more about the situation than you do (which seems unlikely, but you never know).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

I stand corrected. You guys are heroes. Don't change a thing.

---

Really? Having input from a safety perspective is always mansplaining?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shorty_J

Really? Having input from a safety perspective is always mansplaining?

---

Good point. If you’d ask a male guide why they were making those decisions but not a female one because of fear of backlash that’s also sexist and shouldn’t be ok, from your perspective or the guide’s. They’re not immune to criticism for the mere fact they’re women, and if they feel like they are, that’s their problem not yours.

A Kantian deontological perspective would say that an action is right based on the virtue of the action itself or your moral duty to perform said action, not on the consequences or outcome of action.

Recent remotely-triggered avalanche in the general vicinity:

Attachment 401012

Say something and the worst thing that can happen is everyone thinks you're a douche.
Don't say something . . . .

However--if you do say something there's an excellent chance it will make no difference. And whatever you do, don't say something AFTER the bad thing has happened. At that point chances are they've figured it out, if they're still alive.

Based on the account of events posted by the OP, and the subsequent photo, the only correct answer here is option E: there is not enough information provided to answer the question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wapow

So the slope was deemed stable in the avy report and by your own assessment (had already gone big) but you felt the necessity to tell them that it was dangerous? Seems like you were butting in unnecessarily. What am i missing?

---

The one time I went for a ride it was on a west-facing above treeline slope "deemed stable in the avy report" (i.e. no listed problems or concerns) in a zone adjacent to the San Juans.

Tactfully informing someone they're doing something stupid isn't "mansplaining" just because the person doing stupid things is female.

I’m kinda surprised that some people don’t think that safe travel practice in avalanche terrain isn’t priority number one and a habit that needs to be developed regardless of conditions.

I know it takes discipline and that can be hard but it’s something that should become almost second nature.

Sure, if your risk tolerance is high you might even ski the slope in question. One at a time and with eyes on, I can’t see the whole runout but lets assume that there’s a nice gradual runout with no trees. If you can access the top safely. There is no reason to ever transition at the bottom of that slope. Even if you were alone or skiing one at a time you would want to move out of the runout zone to a safe area.

Maybe Wapow can explain his reasoning why what that guided group did was okay.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Seems like a good pic from an educational viewpoint - I have been guilty of viewing the treed ridge as potentially safer terrain, but what's lurking above or to the side. Pic drives it home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skaredshtles

Recent remotely-triggered avalanche in the general vicinity:

Attachment 401012

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn

I’m kinda surprised that some people don’t think that safe travel practice in avalanche terrain isn’t priority number one and a habit that needs to be developed regardless of conditions.

I know it takes discipline and that can be hard but it’s something that should become almost second nature.

Sure, if your risk tolerance is high you might even ski the slope in question. One at a time and with eyes on, I can’t see the whole runout but lets assume that there’s a nice gradual runout with no trees. If you can access the top safely. There is no reason to ever transition at the bottom of that slope. Even if you were alone or skiing one at a time you would want to move out of the runout zone to a safe area.

Maybe Wapow can explain his reasoning why what that guided group did was okay.

---

Strong post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HappyCamper

Seems like a good pic from an educational viewpoint - I have been guilty of viewing the treed ridge as potentially safer terrain, but what's lurking above or to the side. Pic drives it home.

---

The ridge that runs parallel to the fall line in that photo did not slide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

Low risk is not no risk. Moderate risk is not low risk. The problem might be there... the obvious avalanche path says the dragon visits on the regular... how many people to wager at once on that bet when modeling behavior?
Expose one person at a time and no picnicking in the runout.

---

This.
Newbie here.
The value of teaching safe travel cannot be overestimated. TT my feeling is you made a good call chatting "off the record" as it were.

It's always tough to come at this the right way, but I'd hate to be doing CPR on someone I didn't talk to when I thought I should have.

Sent from my SM-A530W using Tapatalk

Attachment 401382

Quote:

---

The ridge that runs parallel to the fall line in that photo did not slide.

---

No, it didn't propagate or entrain that portion of the slope which appears to be less steep, a good bit less wind loaded and has a slightly different aspect. What pulled out appears to be a pocket although a big one.

That said would you feel good traveling up that ridge with the remaining pocket above you? Not saying it could not be safely done after the slide in the photo happened but is that really a safe route?

ETA:I Re-read this and trying to spark discussion not be a dick, kind of the point of this thread in my opinion.

Say something, and BTW, it goes both ways.
5 days ago I was skiing for the 3rd day in a row my local safe-ish spot. I was skiing a spot I have been skiing since 2006, and have never seen it slide. Low angle, etc.
The trailhead is a very popular spot for everyone and anyone, so as I waited for friends alongside the groomed trail to start skinning, a guy stops, waits for his friend, then says to her, thinking I can’t hear: “I wanted to tell you this so I don’t ruin those folk’s ski.”
I listen, but can’t hear, so I tell him, “Those are my tracks from the last 2 days”.
The gal turns and skis by so I say: “Is there an issue or something?” She says “Slab”.
Well thanks.
Anyway, it sort of heightened my awareness on this lap, and I indeed re-evaluated my assessments from the previous days, but as I suspected, the slope was even more stable/stuck than before.
When we finished, we talked with some folks heading out and we shared our experiences with the skiing and conditions, etc. They appreciated it.

Hey Plug if you're talking about skiing above GR I have heard of folks seeing a pretty good sized crown on the main face of C. I had heard about it from someone who has been skiing here for 30 odd years but I can't remember any of the details. I'll try to remember to ask the next time I talk with him

Avoid the main face.

Labeling yourself a guide in America doesn’t mean that much. What’s happened in the San Juan’s is proof of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudimatt7

Labeling yourself a guide in America doesn’t mean that much. What’s happened in the San Juan’s is proof of that.

---

All you need is a pair of Dynafits and a Trust Fund

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snoqpass

All you need is a pair of Dynafits and a Trust Fund

---

Which really demeans the rest of us who have worked for decades to refine our skills, but never went for the pin.

Sent from my SM-A600A using Tapatalk

Well, you always have that sorority pin.;)

If they aren't putting you and your party in any danger I'd mind my own business. We've all made questionable decisions and no one appreciates being reprimanded by the safety police.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudimatt7

Labeling yourself a guide in America doesn’t mean that much. What’s happened in the San Juan’s is proof of that.

---

What's happened in the San Juans?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raisingarizona13

What's happened in the San Juans?

---

Quote:

---

If they aren't putting you and your party in any danger I'd mind my own business. We've all made questionable decisions and no one appreciates being reprimanded by the safety police.

---

I can name a few other instances in CO where a guided group had a bad day due to the poor decision making by the guide.

If you are being compensated to lead a group and calling yourself a guide(and teacher), you should be prepared to receive criticism and take it seriously. You should be constantly trying to up your game to attempt to provide a safe trip for your guests, who have less experience, knowledge, and skill than you do.

This isn't about two private groups criticizing each other to boost egos, this is about a guide taking unnecessary risks with clients while in the roll of teacher and guide.