Printable View
A little history on the 1962 slide in Twin Lakes. Talk about a "Wake Up" call !
http://books.google.com/books?id=TyQ...lanche&f=false
Pg.114
Scary to think I live 30-40 minutes of both Avi's this last week, and 15 minutes from the 1962 Twin Lakes Avi.
Of course we desire as a community to spread awareness and minimize the incident rate. Achievable goals are good for the psyche. Incidents are inevitable despite our best efforts, but part of the best efforts is how we choose to deal with these mistakes. We can learn from others and ourselves. Experience is a series of non-fatal mistakes critically analyzed and used to drive future processes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crampedon
I shot this near Eisenhower (Summit side) on my way thru Thursday eve.
There were very similar slides much of the way down on the north facing aspects, not sure if they are still visible.
http://i474.photobucket.com/albums/r...ps3433be16.jpg
It looks like the starting zone for the slide was in the low 30s and the majority of the slide path was under 25 degrees. Easy to see how that wouldn't feel like super intimidating terrain from a distance... Slides remotely triggered from below scare the shit out of me.
Absolutely cannot imagine how Jerome felt being literally feet away from friends/partners who were buried and being unable to get to them to dig them out. Fucking heartbreaking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crampedon
1st off, sorry for your loss and I hear what you are saying but the cynic in me says, "why this time"?
I can see how this weeks events might influence your decisions but beyond that I am afraid that not much will change on the large scale.
People tend to either forget or take the "won't happen to me" mindset and the circle continues.
What gets me is this group knew enough to know that when they heard that slope fail and I am sure they must have heard.
That they were fucked and there was no way home. They had awakened the sleeping monster above them and now that beast was coming down the hill to kill them and there was no place to run.
Seriously fucked situation.
Wow, so sad to hear this happened.
Vibes to all affected.
We go up intending to ski. Even if we change objectives, we go up with the intention to ski. That we always be the controlling interest and it's nearly impossible to figure all the ways that mindset influences our decisions. I sometimes think of how unthoughtful I am skiing inbounds on powder days. Will two ski cuts really ensure this 48 degree terrain trap won't slide? Nope. Do I ever even consider that before dropping in - not really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunion
Keep skiing aggressively and getting hurt or killed becomes almost inevitable.
I don't think someone bringing up the discussion of dialing back risk acceptance in the ski industry deserves a fuck you. Maybe your remarks were aimed at this being the wrong thread to have a discussion around risk acceptance. My comments refer not to this incident, but to decision making in general. I think everyone has a different level of risk acceptance in the backcountry and that people should be able to determine what they feel comfortable with, find partners with similar feelings and ski accordingly. With that being said I think it is selfish for any of us to make decisions without taking the impact of our decisions on our loved ones into account. This article about Rob Lieberman is a good discussion I am sure my family would be somewhat happier if I only skied 30 degree trees, but they know I like to ski more exciting terrain. Am I not going to not ski because of the pain I might cause my family if I were involved in an accident, no. I still ski and I still ski some big lines with high consequences, however I always try and think about those consequences when I am in the mountains and I think it helps me take a step back and get out of the charging bro-brah mentality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edgnar
I think there is a man-up vibe in the ski community that gets us all into trouble. The high of ticking off a big line is so strong and the feeling is so much better than the crappy feeling after bailing. No one wants to be the one in the group who pulls the plug, but that is what gets us in to trouble. In my mind risk is part of skiing and is part of what makes outdoor activities great, but it is far from everything.
I'm with you. I enjoy challenging myself while skiing so I guess there is risk that comes with my enjoyment- but the risk associated with avalanches is not an aspect that I enjoy whatsoever.Quote:
Originally Posted by funkendrenchman
One analogy would be surfing in shark infested waters vs. surfing an area with no sharks- personally I would have more fun surfing without any fear of a shark attack in the back of my head. It's not a perfect analogy, but that's kind of how I look at it.
Condolences to the friends and family of the deceased.
Edit- Thanks for the link to the Twin Lakes slide, basehound. Interesting stuff.
Maybe. I met some guys in the lodge at loveland the other day; two in their seventies, and one who was 88. Maybe they never skied BC or gave a shit about anything but lift served, but I had to respect their longevity, and they still seemed to be enjoying the fuck out of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by stfu&gbtw
I'd be ok with being one of those crusty old bastards in another 30-40 years. I wonder what those guy's take would be on guys in their 30's dying in the BC?
Of course skiing IB is no guarantee of anything either, but it scares my wife who doesn't ski less, so that's where I find myself most of the time. FWIW, the one avy I've been caught by was IB at Loveland, and the most serious injury; a blown ACL happened OB on Loveland Pass.
I would have expected both to occur in exactly the opposite way.
From the first guy on scene: http://www.wildsnow.com/9938/mike-be...eek-avalanche/
I really do not pay much attention to Lou Dawson. Since apparently he considers me an expert I'll give an opinion. Sadly these guys screwed up. Condolences to the family and friends of the deceased. It is easy to tell if a slope can avalanche. Often it is allot harder to go somewhere else. having triggered slopes from the bottom I realize it is often hard to realize how wide of a berth to give the slope and to imagine triggering the release so far up.
A lot of people are taking issue with my statement that part of the fun is the risk. Maybe I should elaborate, because god knows I'm not the most extreme snowboarder on any mountain, frankly, I'm pretty conservative in the backcountry. But, even if you are only skiing greens and blues in bounds, there is still a risk that you get hurt, or smoke a tree, or have a heart attack. But that little bit of risk of doing something so trivial as sliding on snow on planks of wood and plastic gives you a thrill.
Admit it, deny it, it doesn't matter. Its there. And that is why we do it.
Would I love it if there was never a chance of a an avalanche? Absolutely. But its there, no matter what, and you mitigate it as best as possible. But its there, in the back of you mind, always, and it keeps you on your toes, and makes it that much sweeter when you do get home safely.
I don't know if bc vs. served makes that big a difference for anything accept avy related stuff. And even then, if we were content to enjoy relaxed turns on low angled slopes all the time, the risk factor would fall through the floor. I don't know who said it first, but I always remember the analogy of slope angle to a woman: 35-45 = maximum excitement and maximum danger. I've done both knees, one hip, one shoulder, several concussions, and a now-cronic back injury - not a single one of those injuries occurred in the bc. The doc says I have the body of a 60 year old. I've come to the conclusion that skiing fast in deep snow is asking to get hurt. I still ask all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by bendtheski
Mike's report is accurate, brief, and clearly states how grateful we were in all the help received in the rescue. The discussions leading up to the rescue allowed for us to save Jerome. Having him alive and well gives us something positive in a whole heap of painful emotions.
How could such a tragedy happen within a CAIC event? What the fuck are they reporting there? Is it just simple observations, and nothing really definitive and useful? For such a cataclysmic event to occur, and how many failures through the lines of communication to have occurred, something really is wrong with this current system. If anyone takes this person, you are a celebrity and should fuck off.
This is not the condolences thread, and the result of discussion is answers or change for the future. Because of this fact I think hyperbole type statements of a rhetorical nature should be encouraged. I don't think that always happens in any situations as often times luck plays a huge role.
But in this case it is way different IMO.
Elevation aspects of warning system?
How could anyone not heed such a windloaded terrain trap?
Elevation of the Loveland Valley about 11,400, treeline ends right at that. Huge wind loaded slope, massive temp shifts , high of 38F, almost twice in the past 8 days ( loveland weather station is about 11,600?)
vibes to the family.
really tired of having friends die
Because human beings were interpreting the data and doing the best they could.Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
Agreed...Quote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
agreed, good job by Mike. still not comprehending this completely. hoping CAIC/Jerome can fill in the obvious holes we have in the day...don't really feel like listening to any more assumptions, speculation, WWJD speak. Hope you're doing alright too, Simple.Quote:
Originally Posted by simple
It's a combination. I've spoken about this before but the area CAIC forecasts for in the "Front Range" zone (which is where this area falls) is fucking massive and has hugely variable snowpack. What the conditions up in RMNP were last weekend and what the conditions at Loveland Pass were (and to that point what the conditions in Pikes Peak were because that's in the zone as well) were hugely different. What has happened in those areas snowpack wise all year is hugely different. So to place the blame on CAIC is probably misguided, they would need more funds to be able to split up the regions into smaller zones.Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
That said they were in a terrain trap below a considerable slope that closely resembled slopes that had slid naturally nearby. But if you look at the pictures and know that area ... It's not an intimidating area (at least before this it wasn't to me). I would have been right out there with them without much of a second thought. Of course after this I'd really fucking think twice. On top of that remotely triggering something from below (at least to me) is one of the harder things to account for. Especially on a slope that large. To think you could trigger something that massive remotely to me indicates that it is much more unstable than a considerable rating would indicate. Well see if the ratings change next year (to be more like the UAC) helps that.
I bet the official report will answer this question. Consider skipping the holier-than-thou speculating until we better know what happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
You keep repeating this as if it were relevant to this incident.Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
First, RIP and best wishes and thank you to the 1st responders and Jerome.
Secondly, some of you should either quit BC skiing or not start.
Thirdly, since these tragedies always come with a "let's learn from the mistakes of others", perhaps we should move in that direction.
I'll start by sharing some of my thoughts about the snowpack and BC skiing around the front range this year.
1. Full depth hardslabs have been ripping wall to wall. The frequency has changed but it has never gone away.
2. Hard slabs kill. You can't out run them, ski cutting does nothing.
3. I think the CAIC does an excellent job. I find the "avalanche reports" section to be very helpful. When life ending avalanches are occurring on a regular basis, I stay of those aspects and elevations.
4. Managing larger terrain - actual, not perceived islands of safety, radios, acknowledging that everyone is really skiing solo (companion rescue not viable).
I myself try to be very aware of human factors and decision making. I'm not the most technically trained snow scientist but I have put in quite a bit of time in the backcountry. Recognize that we are all our own worst enemies. Everyone wants to go out and do some good skiing but sometimes that is not what the mountains have in mind.
1. Be critical of both your partners and yourself
2. Don't be afraid to back off lines and walk home
3. Tell people you are uncomfortable with their decision making
4. Stay home if you don't feel comfortable
5. Realize that the mountains are not going anywhere, that line will be in and safe at somepoint.
We all make mistakes every day. BC skiing is all about mitigating the hazards down to a level that the group is comfortable with. Let's collectively try and educate ourselves to fully understand the risks, be honest with ourselves and each other, and adopt a zero tolerance for unsafe practices, AND MAKE GOOD DECISIONS EVERY TIME.
Loveland Pass is part of the Vail/Summit Forecast ZoneQuote:
Originally Posted by georgio
Actually, Loveland Pass is in both Vail/Summit and Front Range zones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit