Killed while filming. How do we backtrack from where we are?

I do lots of contract work and contract some work out; even for my line of work the contracts basically eliminate the type of liability for safety that is implicit in an employer/employee relationship, so I can't imagine OSHA and the lot really applies like normal. Think stuntmen and you'd be closer, but without a script the skier-as-artist model gives a producer or photographer plenty of seemingly-reasonable outs to put all legal responsibility on the athlete. Which is ultimately the only place it can go, but that doesn't mean the athlete is making risk assessments without considering money, reputation or production issues that shouldn't enter into it at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mofro261

Neckbeard nailed it with both those posts.

---

+1

Regarding Estelle Balet's accident a local newspaper mentioned Fasnacht (the other girl) and her went off the heli and dropped right in, no snowpack analysis o.e. since it was considered safe. The intended to board only the top sections and climb back up. However while Balet was going the sluff started accumulating to an extend which finally pushed her entirely into the ravine and all the way down, sending her over several cliffs along.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hicks

+1

Regarding Estelle Balet's accident a local newspaper mentioned Fasnacht (the other girl) and her went off the heli and dropped right in, no snowpack analysis o.e. since it was considered safe. The intended to board only the top sections and climb back up. However while Balet was going the sluff started accumulating to an extend which finally pushed her entirely into the ravine and all the way down, sending her over several cliffs along.

---

Are you talking sluff in the North American sense or the FWT announcer sense? To me, this looks like at least a small slab released.
http://img.nzz.ch/S=W540/O=75/http:/...633eb6265.jpeg

But if it was just sluff it sounds like that was the case for both of the recent deaths. From the Max Arsenault thread in ski/snowboard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Two06

Maxim was my mentor and we became each others number 1 ski partner the last few seasons. It was weird to dig him up and even weirder that he died on something so small. Got off his line and aired 25 feet to a flat, bridged bergshrund and got buried by his sluff. We didn't get to him fast enough. Skiing will always feel different to me now but I feel like it was his fate to leave his body behind that day (4/20). Max inspired so many... take that energy he had for his true purpose (skiing) and apply it to whatever your true purpose is. Never be in a hurry in the mountains, never let your guard down no matter how mellow it looks. RIP Max

---

Smallish slab.
Attachment 181308
Attachment 181307

Terrible consequence

I guess there is the possibility that risk-services are being provided by skiers for less than they are worth, and so both dvd consumers and producers are getting a good deal. No doubt some skiers and producers have their own deals that address the topic, to "do the right thing". The benefit of the doubt should be given. And as has been said over and over, most athletes want to be sitting in that heli. They want to be skiing that terrain. That is their expensive difficult access artform.

For a production company (and/or sponsor) to underwrite their own athlete insurance might be legally and financially difficult.

It would also be an odd situation: having an athlete sign a release of liability waiver, followed by an insurance contract. I am not sure how those two exist side-by-side.

I agree with a comment above: the average film viewer probably doesn't care if they are seeing the best skier in the world with comprehensive terms of compensation, or some charging up and comer who is happy to go without insurance. Good porn is good porn. This isn't a headline title fight.

The Hollywood stunt contractor analogy is thought provoking.

If POW (Protect Our Winters) is a thing in the SRM world, is there also logical room for POA? (Protect Our Athletes)? Or is this just a low incident rate storm in a tea cup?

And...
POR (protect our roofers)
POTC (protect our tower climbers)
POPA (protect our porn actresses)
POSPD (protect our snow plow drivers)

I'm not even convinced that "professional skiers" are getting killed or injured at a higher rate than the average joey. None the less, they are engaged in a risky profession. That is a choice they make. Whether any of us think they are getting fairly compensated not relevant.

I only bring up insurance and contracts and workmans comp liability waivers to demonstrate that systems and protocols are already in place for those in risky professions.

I have a job this summer where my subcontractors and me will have to go up on a machine 3 stories and tear off a deck where the structure may be suspect. We will attempt to follow OSHA guidelines but there are not many good places to tie off. Its a fixed price job. I'll be living my money vs. everyone's safety everyday.

It is all terribly sad, and I don't mean to be callous. I just simply feel that many of the thoughts expressed in this thread have nothing to do with it. But that's just like my opinion man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skinewhere

How much raw footage is needed to create one, single, 60 minute film? I imagine that 100's of hours of film don't make the final cut. Crews could go ahead and dig snow pits on all of these heli-lines you see in the film, but that would take a great amount of time, energy and money.

The sponsors want a finished product in the allotted time, so safety is probably not priority #1.

---

Agreed with this!!

I f we could just make extreme skiing safer maybe I could get a gig

OTOH

I suck

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

And...
POR (protect our roofers)
POTC (protect our tower climbers)
POPA (protect our porn actresses)
POSPD (protect our snow plow drivers)

I'm not even convinced that "professional skiers" are getting killed or injured at a higher rate than the average joey. None the less, they are engaged in a risky profession. That is a choice they make. Whether any of us think they are getting fairly compensated not relevant.

I only bring up insurance and contracts and workmans comp liability waivers to demonstrate that systems and protocols are already in place for those in risky professions.

I have a job this summer where my subcontractors and me will have to go up on a machine 3 stories and tear off a deck where the structure may be suspect. We will attempt to follow OSHA guidelines but there are not many good places to tie off. Its a fixed price job. I'll be living my money vs. everyone's safety everyday.

It is all terribly sad, and I don't mean to be callous. I just simply feel that many of the thoughts expressed in this thread have nothing to do with it. But that's just like my opinion man.

---

callously solid
we had 2 ut avvy deaths
twice that inbounds, but not avalaunches, trauma
think we are over 300 opiate overdoses fatalities
the avalanche deaths get hyped to the bejeeebus and mmacq by (cough) experts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powdork

Are you talking sluff in the North American sense or the FWT announcer sense? To me, this looks like at least a small slab released.

---

Doesn't matter how you call it...the result stands for itself. It was said to have been really small but developed before it caught up with Estelle. Infos contradict on whether she triggered it herself or whether it came down on her from a neighbouring couloir above.

Not sure whether that could be a snowboard track in the slide path right to the small ridge ....

Attachment 181336


She was reported to have boarded the green line ok as initially planned before the momentum of the slab took her all the way down thru the ravine (red)

Attachment 181337


Subtle posted this pic of the Couloir Est over in the Snow For The euros thread, showing it less steep than the pic above but still no way to survive that ride if taken entirely down.

Attachment 181339

They spotted her right away at the bottom but were unable to resuscitate here, she was gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

Sounds like you dudes ^^^ are kinda on the inside so you probably know the answers to the questions I'm asking. Really, I'm wanting to know if the ski movie industry is an way legitimate in terms of existing employment, contracting and insurance regulation.

I'm sure [insert large diversified extreme sports video company] carries liability insurance. I'm sure given the nature of their business they have an annual insurance audit. If they are writing checks to "athletes" either as employees or contractors their liability and/or workmans comp insure will be kicking the tires to analyze risk.

What part of this do I have wrong?

---

Companies pay movie producers a ton of money to have their employees/contract workers in their movies. These skiers are getting paid by their sponsors, not the film companies. So the sponsors should give them insurance, if anyone should. But usually when they get hurt, the sponsors drop them, and the film company finds a replacement athlete.

I've heard Warren Miler pays though, but I have no idea if that's true. I'm guessing it is true.

The responsibility of skiing or backing off always, always lies on the skier. Some companies have started training their athletes though, like TGR, and hire top-notch guides which is awesome. Looks like the guide with Estelle simply made a bad call, and maybe the guide was top-notch anyways. But that runout was crazy long if anything went wrong, and it did.

Max just had a simple mental mistake while skiing. That's all it takes, a simple mistake, and everyone in the game knows it. Humans are not going to stop making small mistakes, but you can try to avoid ski terrain/conditions where a small mistake is death. Easier said than done when filming, but definitely possible.

And if there was no risk, what fun would it be to ski some crazy lines? The sense of surviving and feeling invincible is addictive.

These accidents are heartbreaking and they have been on my mind every day, same as when this shit happens every year. I think a lot about the risk reward ratio, and how nature doesn't give a flying fuck about us. I think about the fact that we are all just a warm piece of meat in the mountains. I think about the grieving friends and families, and I think about how I have the ultimate responsibility not to put my own family in this position. But I honestly wouldn't even trade living and recreating in my little corner of windswept, continental slag piles of mountains for any degree of safety or security in some shit ass existance in any version of the modern rat race. Fuck the flatlands, fuck the beach, fuck the city, fuck the heat, fuck the gym, fuck tinder, fuck clubbing, fuck the big fat wedding, the white picket fence, and the 2.1 kids, fuck everything that "normal" people do, and fuck all to hell working 9 to 5 on weekdays. I am just an average poser, and I wouldn't give it up for love nor money.

I get sad when my heroes die. I get scared shitless at times doing things far more pedestrian than they do. But I fucking love skiing more every year. I love the rush of going fast and catching some air, as has been said by better wordsmiths that I, it's not fun it's life truly lived. No amount of positive or negative reinforcement short of serious breakage or death will ever stop me from wanting more.

So from that perspective, "In theory" if TGR or Matchstick were offering me a ride in the heli, even being older, somewhat wiser, definetly more broken than in my 20's, I would jump at the chance, fuck insurance, they wouldn't even have to pay me, they could throw the footage in the trash and call me a gaper. So I just don't understand the desire by the community to hold these athletes back. I just can't imagine that any of them would want to be held back by increased regulation and prohibitive production cost.

Let them live the dream, no one is holding a gun to their heads, it's a first world problem. Having so much fun you knowingly accept the risk of death. They are deciding the risk is worth it, because it's the best goddamn lifestyle on this godforsaken planet! Unfortunately there is not much more of a market for these types of movies than currently exists so yeah, funds are limited. That said, if the athletes decide the risk is not worth it, or if the market will not bear the cost of making the movies in the future then the problem will be solved that way. Fine, people will just ski purely for fun again, we can live without the ski media, and make our own movies.

Let people do what they want and follow their own dreams, maybe new film companies will be spawned which will in turn create a competitive environment to foster more lucrative contracts and better safety protocol. There is always a cost, in any high risk activity, of being a pioneer, of wanting to be the best. It takes a special kind of person. There are not many of that kind of people, appreciate them for what they have given us, the doors of opportunity they leave open in their wake. Just look what Shane gave us in the last 10 yrs alone, and he went on record: He wouldn't have traded it for anything.

As for me and countless others, I'll keep skiing and doing dumber shit than is in my best interest for free, so I don't think there will be any shortage of people who will do it for glory and the highest level of self actualization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muted

Companies pay movie producers a ton of money to have their employees/contract workers in their movies. These skiers are getting paid by their sponsors, not the film companies. So the sponsors should give them insurance, if anyone should. But usually when they get hurt, the sponsors drop them, and the film company finds a replacement athlete. ........

Max just had a simple mental mistake while skiing. That's all it takes, a simple mistake, and everyone in the game knows it. Humans are not going to stop making small mistakes, but you can try to avoid ski terrain/conditions where a small mistake is death. Easier said than done when filming, but definitely possible.

---

To your first point, that is what Salomon is doing so well. I'm into ski movies and contests way more than the average bear, but couldn't tell you what Ian Mac, Angel Collinson or a dozen other great riders ski on. But the Salomon episodes get me to know every one of their skiers.

And your second point is why i started this thread. It seems every year the mistake that needs to happen gets a little smaller. Technology is trying to keep up with body armor and airbags and such, but it is still lagging behind the curve. I don't think things will get dialed back nor do I want them to. I just want people to stop dying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powdork

but couldn't tell you what Ian Mac, Angel Collinson

---

Volkl for both. But yeah, Salomon does a great job with that. And based on that article with Cody in Powder a few months ago - http://www.powder.com/the-end-game/ - it sounds like they've taken serious steps to avoid putting too much pressure on their athletes to put themselves in harm's way. So they're kind of leading the charge in trying to change things, it seems.

I supose they can make small features look big or do something besides big AK lines?

I toured around with the Salomon guy as he was scoping a story on the Hankin BC area, because it doesnt seem exciting enough to shoot an action movie I had to ask "you can shoot a movie here" and Jeff said "Oh yeah no probelm!"

they came back with the crew but due to bad weather they got all the back ground but no action

Neck Beard, you know what you're talking about

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muted

Looks like the guide with Estelle simply made a bad call, and maybe the guide was top-notch anyways. But that runout was crazy long if anything went wrong, and it did.

---

Aside from the mere length there are cliffs in the runout to navigate around where she was likely swept over. Indeed a bad place to be as a passenger in a slide. Terrible consequence just for the want of film footage of the top 500 ft.

Young athletes like here are often accompanied by guides and rely on their judgement whether a line is safe or not. But also in general we see a rise in accidents where guides are involved in recent years just due to the mere expansion off-piste skiing has seen.

Came here to post that.

Better link https://www.instagram.com/p/BEq7BnTuGz7/?r=240396477

Looked like a good line choice and slough management to me. I know that second clip was a "FWT slough" (i.e. small slab release) but Candide clearly knew he had the spine to escape to which was more or less an island of safety.

The real key here, of course, is that he's not doing this above several hundred feet of exposure.

The comment about someone skinning at the bottom of the slope... Really? Notice there's a camera crew filming this too. Do you really believe he's dropping in on someone?

Is the point that he shouldn't ski this because some joey might try to do the same? Well then, I guess no one should ever do anything then.

Hello nanny state how are you? Keeping yourself busy? Good. The sheep need your protection.

I don't see much Nanny State here. I see Capitalist State, in which all factors of production should be priced correctly. And perhaps they are being already? Perhaps film-skiers are happy to take what they get (both monetary and nonmonetary) in exchange for what they give.

No one said reduce risk. Some people have started to hypothesize whether risk is being paid for appropriately.

Others are saying that nothing should get in the way of the worlds best skiers skiing on the absolute edge at all times. It certainly seems like the world is capable of producing more than enough people willing to sign the waiver and push the limits at the current market rate of compensation. That is valuable in the times of WWI and WWII, polar exploration, and one day, martian exploration:

http://cdn0.lostateminor.com/wp-cont...ton-job-ad.jpg

But... This Is Just Skiing. Or... Conquering The Useless?

Personally, I see it as a race to the bottom so long as sponsors and producer fail to fully compensate that which is given, or contingently may be given. And so long as retail consumers continue to undervalue that which is given. I am not saying risk should be reduced. I do not like anyone telling anyone else what to do. I do however trust in equilibrium to a certain degree, and have proposed that there is currently disequilibrium.

I'm willing to bet Candide would have skied those lines without the cameras rolling. Plenty of people did plenty of crazy shit for a long time without being paid or filmed.

Progresssion has made what was cool in 1990 pretty tame today. Progression has made park riders access backcountry with little to no training to throw huge air off things that they do every day in a park environment. Progression has taken guys who know the backcountry to do shit I would only dream in full flow at full speed on 60 degree faces.

The comments about better gear causing increased risk seem ill informed to me. Like the guy who claims he doesn't wear a helmet because he won't take big risk if he doesn't have a helmet on. If you've ever seen human brains on the ground, you want your friends to wear as much shit as possible. I always think about the times I've hit things under an inch of snow in a field of powder and had big digs in my Helmets. When you make a mistake, it isn't the gears fault, it's yours.

I haven't filmed, but it would seem the filming environment would amplify group think. They are spending on camera, crew and often air time. On a blue bird day, the pressure must be big to get the lines they came for. Hell, I am the worst about Powder fever and I don't have anyone counting on me with a budget.

This is great reading. Neck Beard's analysis of properly pricing the cost of production is spot on. This has nothing to do with advocating a nanny state or comparing it with how many people die in car accidents.

Keeping with this economic analysis, the labor supply outstrips the demand, and we know what that does to wages (whether it be in salary or insurance). This is amplified by the mentality in the "major" sports - if you're injured, someone else is waiting to take your job, and the athlete feels pressure to play while injured and/or concussed. In the ski/snowboard context, when looking down at a particular line, the athlete's inner voice is compromised by the pressure to get the shot. If they back down, it costs money, and there's always someone waiting in line for the next movie who has a higher risk threshold.

[edit] I just read the Powder article which makes this point - about the pressure to deliver running the potential to cloud judgement & risk assessment.

I have a buddy who works as a stunt coordinator, and he's left gigs because his risk assessment was too conservative for the production company. These same producers were begging him to run future projects after his judgement was proven correct. More pressure (on the guides, in our freeride film example).

To the original question, there's likely no going backward, in terms of the product that the general public wants to buy (Roman gladiators in the colliseum), as the ratchet cranks one way (or as XXX-er commented - the genie is out of the bottle).

Me? One of my favorite videos is the "Otter Body Experience" as it took us through the thought process of (first and foremost) evaluating and managing risk. I'll bet that most on this thread would agree, but I'd also bet that we're in the minority.

Cheers,
Thom

I posed this question to MikeD when he did the TGR ask me anything.

Basically I was watching old ski movies, and the number of now dead people stood out like a sore thumb.

I asked him what he thought.

To paraphrase, he said that he and other pros talk about this all the time, an he said skiing was definitely not worth dying for.

He said the way out of this, the way skiing could save itself, was through creativity.

I agree with MikeD.

I stopped watching movies a few years ago, because so many people were dying. I stopped enjoying watching.

Skiers have bashed pretty hard into the human physical limits of skiing, and I think creativity is the better option.

Creativity is more entertaining. Creativity gets me stoked. Creativity can save lives, and skiing.

I think skiing needs to show that it has smart creative people. That skiing is not about some soon-to-be-dead meatbag scraping down some 60 degree face and hucking meat...only to be replaced by some other nameless meatbag.

Smart, creative, personalities can save skiing, while simultaneously backing off the dead "hero" meme.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by puregravity

66 People killed in Europe this year in avy's.
Many more next year with all the newbies hitting the backcountry.
It is becoming an epidemic.

---

The general consensus seems to be that fatalities are not increasing with rising user numbers in Europe. See eg here for Switzerland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by klar

The general consensus seems to be that fatalities are not increasing with rising user numbers in Europe. See eg here for Switzerland.

---

OK. I'll have to look at that.
For the USA, the chart shows a general increase in fatalities.
I controlled for Touring and Sledding.
http://public.tableau.com/shared/RBK...play_count=yes

Fatalities is not as common because of rescue and medical advances too.
And somewhat factored on weather and luck.
But what about injuries?

How do they measure 'per user' rates for backcountry / extreme sports?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by puregravity

Fatalities is not as common because of rescue and medical advances too.

But what about injuries?

How do they measure 'per user' rates for backcountry / extreme sports?

---

They go through a fair amount of statistics for "serious avalanches", which they define as fatality, injury, complete burial, or combination thereof. I do not think they measure a 'per user' rate in this study, they simply point out that the number of "serious avalanches" has remained more or less stable during the last 20 years, despite an increase in users and increased reporting of incidents. They attribute this at least partially to advances in rescue techniques, yes.

Pretty good interview with Sam Anthamatten about Estelle's accident and decision making while filming.

http://www.1815.ch/news/wallis/aktue...uns-geschockt/

It's in German so run it thru Google translator.

Well, since I'm seemingly heavily involved in this discussion here, chose to layout a lot of my inner thoughts in the Powder article and am a constant analyst of the state of skiing, I'm open to any direct questions if you guys have any. But first and foremost, to add to the commentary, I will say as of now, there are simply no concrete answers to why my heroes and friends are dying doing this sport. Though the single most simple way I can boil it down is to this: The mountains and the backcountry are inherently unpredictable and incredibly dangerous. When you're in them, you're swimming with sharks. The more time you're swimming, the more your odds rise that you could be bitten. Sure there are a plethora of other factors--risk, technology, collective progression of what is possible-- that are leading to deaths and injuries, but ultimately, the number of people spending a majority of their winter in the backcountry has exponentially risen in the last twenty years. More and more people are spending more and more days out there. So regardless of your education, your risk calculation, your skill, your line selection, the odds of dying or getting hurt are going to rise the more time you spend out there.

Now, that's the simplest answer I can boil this whole problem down to. From there it gets more complex. Sure I got my theories and thoughts...but none of them are proven and none of them could account for every pro's or joe's death out there. But for myself, I'm consciously making decisions in my career and day-to-day skiing to achieve my number one goal in skiing: Don't Die.

Thanks for chiming in Alka. If you don't want to answer any of these questions, no problem. Also, you can answer them generally for pro skiers instead of personally if you prefer.

a. How really is the perception that the level of risks taken increased dramatically once the heli, film crew, fluffers etc. are on site?

b. How does the whole workmans comp, liability insurance, contract thing work?

c. Is there a large difference, in your opinion, between TGR/MSP type filming and protocols vs. self financed and filmed stuff (probably the wrong terminologies but it seems like there are an few different ways content gets made).

How you had/are having a great season. Stay safe. Don't Die. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

Thanks for chiming in Alka. If you don't want to answer any of these questions, no problem. Also, you can answer them generally for pro skiers instead of personally if you prefer.

a. How really is the perception that the level of risks taken increased dramatically once the heli, film crew, fluffers etc. are on site?

b. How does the whole workmans comp, liability insurance, contract thing work?

c. Is there a large difference, in your opinion, between TGR/MSP type filming and protocols vs. self financed and filmed stuff (probably the wrong terminologies but it seems like there are an few different ways content gets made).

How you had/are having a great season. Stay safe. Don't Die. Thanks.

---

I'm not Alka level of pro extremo but I've been on my fair share of film/photo shoots. As another data point I'll answer those questions as well.

A: IMO there's a microscopically increased level of "we need to get the shot" with film/photo/fluffers around, but for the most part everyone I've worked with (athletes and photo/film) has been super cool if anyone in the group has doubts or concerns. Every once in a while I'll get pressure to do something I don't feel comfortable doing but at this point in my "career" I have no problems telling someone to fuck off if I'm not feeling it. All that being said I have seen some younger up-and-comers jump on some pretty gnarly stuff without any sort of hesitation. Maybe I'm just getting old but I'd prefer to get older.

While everyone wants to get the shot, everyone also wants to go home intact at the end of the day and that's the #1 priority. I tend to think that bad things happen if/when people lose sight of that. I can also say from personal experience that I've gotten wiser as I've gotten older. Perhaps the best thing I can pass on to the younger generation of extremos is that it's a marathon, not a sprint. Try and be smart about being in the mountains. Don't huck to flat. Of course trying to explain this to a 16-year-old that still bounces and only wants to go huge to hardpack is usually pretty futile but man, if I could take back some of those bad landings I certainly would.

B: I'm on the hook for my own insurance and whatnot.

C: can't really compare as I've only done the latter.

Filming or shooting or just skiing for fun - it's up to the individual to make their own decisions.

i think one could easily equate the feeling of pressure from a camera crew to the same pressure you feel when you get to the top of the line and suddenly the skies clear after being graybird all day. it's time to shit or get off the pot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

Thanks for chiming in Alka. If you don't want to answer any of these questions, no problem. Also, you can answer them generally for pro skiers instead of personally if you prefer.

a. How really is the perception that the level of risks taken increased dramatically once the heli, film crew, fluffers etc. are on site?

---

The pressure is really far higher in the summer and in your mind the night before. I can't speak for all pro's and I've seen a lot of different reasons why skiers do what they do...but 90% of the big mountain skiers are in it purely for the joy of it. Day of filming, I've never felt the direct pressure of the cameras. Sure you feel that this is the time to do what you do, to accomplish what's been racing through your head for years and for you to step up your game but I have absolutely never done anything that felt beyond my means because of the cameras. You work closely with crews all year and their is a comfort with them that doesn't push you to do beyond what you believe your capable of. Most would be astounded how often we back down and how often we don't even look in the direction of 'pushing it'. In all reality, there is only a couple days a year and a few lines per year where I feel like I'm laying a lot on the line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

b. How does the whole workmans comp, liability insurance, contract thing work?

---

We're all independent contractors. All liability, insurance is on us and workman's comp has never even been a possibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

c. Is there a large difference, in your opinion, between TGR/MSP type filming and protocols vs. self financed and filmed stuff (probably the wrong terminologies but it seems like there are an few different ways content gets made).

---

I honestly do think there are differences. When you're starting out, working with the small guys, working your own way up the ladder, you often don't have the budget, access or culture to hire guides and safety staff. With TGR/MSP/Salomon FSTV, we pretty much always have guides or safety staff on hand. Most heli companies we fly with have two guides with us at all times. Even when we're sort of 'guiding' ourselves--like this most recent camping, hiking and skiing trip to Alaska--we still will hire a guide so that there is one person, always focused on safety, rescue and rescue logistics. We often go out in our backyards with out guides but these days most filming is trip based and therefore there is generally guides there. When I was younger, making my way up, unless we were heli-skiing, there was never a guide, nor much culture surrounding the idea of safety or even group training. I believe things have changed a bit in the past 5 years because of all the recent deaths and accidents so there is a higher avalanche understanding and better safety culture, but for the most part, it's hard to hire a guide when you're making $2k a year from your sponsors and $20k a year from your restaurant job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

How you had/are having a great season. Stay safe. Don't Die. Thanks.

---

Thanks!

You may have answered yourself between your two posts:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alkasquawlik

there are simply no concrete answers to why my heroes and friends are dying doing this sport.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alkasquawlik

In all reality, there is only a couple days a year and a few lines per year where I feel like I'm laying a lot on the line.

---

personally, i don't lay it on the line. others may think that i do, but i always feel like i'm leaving myself some margin, especially in the backcountry. i've gotten to the bottom of an objective after two days of approach and turned away; i've climbed an objective with a friend who said "there's no fucking way i'm dropping into that" and we've turned away; and i've watched a friend tomahawk down a couloir over a day out from any car (no "spot" or cells phones, either) and luckily come out with a broken pair of shades and a mental shake-up.

I have only skimmed this thread, but it was posted due to deaths by avalanche. pro skiers dying from avalanches while skiing in avalanche terrain. i'm in the camp of if you play in the terrain enough, the potential of shit hitting the fan goes up, even if you're conceivably doing all the "right things". guides get taken out, clients get taken out, avi professionals get taken out. i've heard Tom Kimbrough discuss his first observation of (and almost being caught in a) "corn slab" in 2005 - at that time, he'd actively worked in "the industry" since the early 70's. there's always uncertainty.

i think the "trend" of hitting the big lines in europe and more remote areas in the lower 48 in good soft snow conditions could result in more avalanche-related deaths.

if the accidents that triggered the start of this thread were more similar to paul ruff's death or mcconkey's death, imo, a discussion of backtracking could make more sense. i recall reading an article in powder maybe 30 years ago that described the european "extreme" scene. the narrative, to me, was pretty wild; the media frenzy and intensity of self promotion for a new first descent. it read like self-imposed pressure to perform. i also remember how that article discussed a pro snowboarder who died (ice slide to death) during his warm-up run before his big scheduled descent....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bodywhomper

if the accidents that triggered the start of this thread were more similar to paul ruff's death or mcconkey's death, imo, a discussion of backtracking could make more sense. i recall reading an article in powder maybe 30 years ago that described the european "extreme" scene. the narrative, to me, was pretty wild; the media frenzy and intensity of self promotion for a new first descent. it read like self-imposed pressure to perform. i also remember how that article discussed a pro snowboarder who died (ice slide to death) during his warm-up run before his big scheduled descent....

---

the recent accidents may have prompted me to actually write the post (max was probably my favorite skier), but it's a thought that's been in my head since alka's line of the year. mostly because that would have involved the slightest human error, rather than mother nature just jumping up and saying 'it's time'.

i don't understand why more people don't backtrack and become fans of cricket crochet or curlin or a host of other sports that require way less risk toleranances

i thought google was gonna find some funny cricket accidents but there have actually been a surprising amount of cricket related deaths. maybe skiing is the safer of the two sports

It's an accepted cricket-related risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by puregravity

What is missing with Candide, it's all clips of riding. There is no interview, no talking with the athlete, no contextualization, no feedback, no Q & A, no 'personality' on any of these posts on his FB wall.
There is no athlete-to-viewer communication beyond the view of him always riding in the distance or wearing a POV camera.

---

You're probably the only person in the world asking for this from Candide. Not that he couldn't do it, but um, have you seen his view counts? Why would he need to do anything other than what he's doing?