At least 3 dead, 15 injured after B.C. avalanche

Just a thought on how to regulate the backcountry since every year it seems to keep being pushed that way.

Just like a Fishing Liscence the user should have a Winter Backcountry Liscence which the government awards you after completing a certain level of avalanche training course. Everyone who has passed the requirement can prove their qualifications to bypass the required course and every 5 years everyone must renew the liscence.

Once you have the liscence everyone becomes accountable for their own actions. If your out there without a liscence make it criminal. People will get the point and eventually everyone will learn to be responsible for their actions....none of this finger pointing and blaming bullshit thats going on with this story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eirikainersharp

not to pick at a moot point but seeing as your critiquing my professional oppinon it sure seemed to meed the definition of a Size 4 to me since i could easily have "destroy a railway car, large truck, or several buildings".

---

For clarification, the CAC is calling the slide a size 2.5 - 3...

http://www.avalanche.ca/cac/bulletin...outh-columbia/

"Special Message
Boulder Mountain Avalanche Incident Revelstoke B.C. Saturday March 13, 2010 3pm. Slab, size 2.5 – 3, incline: “steep,” NE aspect, low Alpine feature (~2300m), main section that affected the people involved ~300m wide, significantly more fracture line wraps around shoulder, perhaps another 300m, linear run about 700m including running over a bench at about 2000m then down a steep slope below to edge of mature timber. Depth of debris up to 3m. Two fatalities, 19 hospitalized (1 critical, 3 serious). Tens of sleds destroyed or seriously damaged. Rescue winding down. Miracle that no more people were killed or injured. See RCMP press release."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by teamdirt

Just a thought on how to regulate the backcountry since every year it seems to keep being pushed that way.

Just like a Fishing License the user should have a Winter Backcountry License which the government awards you after completing a certain level of avalanche training course. Everyone who has passed the requirement can prove their qualifications to bypass the required course and every 5 years everyone must renew the license.

Once you have the license everyone becomes accountable for their own actions. If your out there without a license make it criminal. People will get the point and eventually everyone will learn to be responsible for their actions....none of this finger pointing and blaming bullshit that's going on with this story.

---

Sure accountable, that ain't gonna happen. That is like using spell check. It is there, it is easy, but why bother when someone else will take care of it for you ;).

I prefer no regulation and let people keep dieing if that is their choice. I really get pissed with the "why didn't some one stop them" BS that is being spewed, or even better "they were from Alberta and didn't know any better".

The people that brought kids, that was their choice; not my kids so it is not for me to say but, I hope those kids are going to be way more knowledgeable than their parents if they end up sleddin'. The people that were just spectators sledded out there, thus they were participants and should know the risks.
Ignorance is not an excuse.

As for the public out cry... sheep are sheep. People are generally idiots (I don't give a fuck if they ski, board, sled - the good folks are on the tails of the gaussian curve - there is no hope for the snowbladers). And the general public tends to be a great example of collective stupidity.

Until people are forced to take responsibility for themselves increasing regulation will just fuck a bunch of people with common sense over.

Like it or not I think they will regulate with sled licensing , permits and closures

And people will poach, there are closures all ready. But every one knows there is no enforcement.

sure but it sounds good on TV and some people will follow the rules

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L7

I heard both of those interviews on CBC today and they were unreal. The second guy who was there said he took his avie course in Golden a couple of weeks ago. He also said the two guys who 'gave' the course were right there with him a the bottom of the slope. So the guys teaching these guys courses don't have the sense to park themselves somewhere other than the bottom of an avie path loaded with fresh snow under a 'high' warning with sledders high marking it.

---

yup... i was glad to see those guys faces when we landed but pretty dissapointed to see them there at all. not a good way to lead by example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shorty_J

For clarification, the CAC is calling the slide a size 2.5 - 3...

http://www.avalanche.ca/cac/bulletin...outh-columbia/

"Special Message
Boulder Mountain Avalanche Incident Revelstoke B.C. Saturday March 13, 2010 3pm. Slab, size 2.5 – 3, incline: “steep,” NE aspect, low Alpine feature (~2300m), main section that affected the people involved ~300m wide, significantly more fracture line wraps around shoulder, perhaps another 300m, linear run about 700m including running over a bench at about 2000m then down a steep slope below to edge of mature timber. Depth of debris up to 3m. Two fatalities, 19 hospitalized (1 critical, 3 serious). Tens of sleds destroyed or seriously damaged. Rescue winding down. Miracle that no more people were killed or injured. See RCMP press release."

---

maybe i overestimated in the stress of the moment. but it sure seemed bigger than other size 3s I've seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by teamdirt

Just a thought on how to regulate the backcountry since every year it seems to keep being pushed that way.

Just like a Fishing Liscence the user should have a Winter Backcountry Liscence which the government awards you after completing a certain level of avalanche training course. Everyone who has passed the requirement can prove their qualifications to bypass the required course and every 5 years everyone must renew the liscence.

Once you have the liscence everyone becomes accountable for their own actions. If your out there without a liscence make it criminal. People will get the point and eventually everyone will learn to be responsible for their actions....none of this finger pointing and blaming bullshit thats going on with this story.

---

I wish they'd do that anyhow. I don't have a problem paying for registration on my sleds, it's not that different than a boat or car. If you've got registration, you've got a way to regulate, so require an avy class in order to register.
The problem would come in location, do you require this of the flatlanders that won't ever see avy terrain unless they come out here? So then do we require them to get a class their first day on vacation to get an in state or province tag? Hell, I'm ok with that. I'd LOVE to not see some douche from IA or NE highmark above me or see three of them on one hill... It's getting less & less common, but still a way to regulate the new people into at least a realization of how important avy safety is would be great!

Hearing that people with that kind of avy knowledge/experience were sitting there in an avy runout just blows me away. I know the mob mentality sets in in large groups, but still I would think that those people would set themselves apart from that. I know SOME did, but I wish people were more vocal, it seems that people are afraid to hurt someone's feelers when it comes to saying something as simple as "hey, I REALLY don't think that's a good idea", disappointing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by backcountryislife

I wish they'd do that anyhow. I don't have a problem paying for registration on my sleds, it's not that different than a boat or car. If you've got registration, you've got a way to regulate, so require an avy class in order to register.
The problem would come in location, do you require this of the flatlanders that won't ever see avy terrain unless they come out here? So then do we require them to get a class their first day on vacation to get an in state or province tag? Hell, I'm ok with that. I'd LOVE to not see some douche from IA or NE highmark above me or see three of them on one hill... It's getting less & less common, but still a way to regulate the new people into at least a realization of how important avy safety is would be great!

Hearing that people with that kind of avy knowledge/experience were sitting there in an avy runout just blows me away. I know the mob mentality sets in in large groups, but still I would think that those people would set themselves apart from that. I know SOME did, but I wish people were more vocal, it seems that people are afraid to hurt someone's feelers when it comes to saying something as simple as "hey, I REALLY don't think that's a good idea", disappointing.

---

I was thinking all winter backcountry users would require this liscence including self propelled enthusiasts. Only makes sense that it would have to be accross the board.

Another thing I think you can count on is the BC gov't will consult heavily with existing heli and cat operators since they are the accept experts in the area. We all know they don't like having their terrain 'poached' so watch for regulations protecting those leases to be included. I'm not sure it will happen but I'm damn sure the commercial guys will try to get it in there.

On their side of the coin if they spend money and heli time stabilizing a slope they use why should they end up with it tracked to shit when they go to use it. Potentially their control work makes it the best safe terrain around but they want the work to benefit them.

I doubt it will go well for the individual and responsible users.

Personally, I think that any repercussions from this tragedy will be increased regulation of informal events of this type, not snowmobiling or other winter activities. It was the event that created an aura of safety due to sheer numbers and a feeling that "somebody would have canceled this" if it wasn't safe (some people would have thought this, not all, as evidenced by the folks who said they stayed away)

I think they'll be taking a harder look at things if they see a flyer for an informal bike race or snowmobile gathering or whatever. Better have insurance, and medical staff, and... everything else that real organized events have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moose Pit

Sure accountable, that ain't gonna happen. That is like using spell check. It is there, it is easy, but why bother when someone else will take care of it for you ;).

I prefer no regulation and let people keep dieing if that is their choice. I really get pissed with the "why didn't some one stop them" BS that is being spewed, or even better "they were from Alberta and didn't know any better".

The people that brought kids, that was their choice; not my kids so it is not for me to say but, I hope those kids are going to be way more knowledgeable than their parents if they end up sleddin'. The people that were just spectators sledded out there, thus they were participants and should know the risks.
Ignorance is not an excuse.

As for the public out cry... sheep are sheep. People are generally idiots (I don't give a fuck if they ski, board, sled - the good folks are on the tails of the gaussian curve - there is no hope for the snowbladers). And the general public tends to be a great example of collective stupidity.

Until people are forced to take responsibility for themselves increasing regulation will just fuck a bunch of people with common sense over.

---

:smile::smile::smile: +1 Very well said.....you cant fix stupid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goldenboy

Personally, I think that any repercussions from this tragedy will be increased regulation of informal events of this type, not snowmobiling or other winter activities. It was the event that created an aura of safety due to sheer numbers and a feeling that "somebody would have canceled this" if it wasn't safe (some people would have thought this, not all, as evidenced by the folks who said they stayed away)
.

---

I disagree ,there is already a report in hands of government re: the 19 dead sledders last year and the fact sledders appear to be killing themselves while BC skiers are not ...the latest govy response IS NOT about a single event this is the straw that broke the camels back

A good time to announce sweeping changes in the BC policy in BC is when there is lots of news coverage ...it make the gov look like they actually do something

You can bet the heli-ski industry will be in on this ,they been complaining about rescues affecting their ops when they have to drop everything to help, as for poached terrain I was told they bomb drainages to keep out the sleds when its possible ...one well placed charge will close a lot of terrain

I know A govy guy who has ref 'ed the meetings when all the stake holders come together to cut up the BC pie ,he sez they all have to deal and give up things/get things ... this will affect those decisions in the meetings where it all gets decided

Question: Was this event being held on public land?

The city of revy disavowed themselves of all blame in an interview on the screen ,the event was on crown land , pretty much all bc skiing and sledding is on crown land

More regulation, licensing and government fees (read: taxes) in my life? That sounds great, where do I sign up? :nonono2::nonono2:

This is a huge slippery slope and can only mean less access for responsible users. L7 has a good point about the heli and cat ops as well, they'll be at the table for sure arguing for restricting access to their tenures.

As for avy courses being a part of the licensing process? Did everyone miss that there were people with avy training -- and even instructors -- caught up in this slide?

No amount of regulation or licensing is going to fix stupid. It will just create hassle for the rest of us, or turn ordinary people into law breakers.

Even Justin Trudeau, the son of massive-government Pierre Trudeau, and who's brother was killed in an avy was quoted on CBC as being against regulation

in BC public land = crown land (that's what we call it... you know, the queen owns it...)

increased regulation was already coming before this happened. I don't think the backcountry will be regulated but what is going to happen is licensing and insurance for sleds and quads. This should have happened ages ago- they are motorized vehicles, they are driven like other motorized vehicles are. I don't see how it's a hassle- you have a license to drive your car, and they are required to drive boats, same thing, adds a level of accountability and maybe funding towards fixing the stuff that goes wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by teamdirt

I was thinking all winter backcountry users would require this liscence including self propelled enthusiasts. Only makes sense that it would have to be accross the board.

---

I'd love to see this happen, but the implementation would be nearly impossible & the enforcement would be very expensive. Sledders are required to buy registration (in the states at least) so that gives an in for using an existing system of regulation to just enhance what is already there.
Bc users though are just so much harder to in down. Do I need a license to go for a hike by my house? If I go about 2 miles from the trailhead by my place I could be in avy terrain. What about the snowshoer just going up for a hike? I just can't see it happening. I like the idea of something similar to a fishing license, but it's so grey to me who would need it & who wouldn't.

Don't get me wrong, snowshoers, hikers, skiers sledders, DRIVERS even have all been killed when they didn't think they were in avy terrain & had no clue what was coming. Education could benefit many people, but I just think it's a far reaching effort.


edit: in reply to the comment that more education won't fix things like this, The way I see it the more people there are that know it's a bad idea, the less people there will be to make the wrong decision in the first place. If the majority says, "broh-brah, this is a bad idea..." the minority seems stupid to continue. Up there I get a feeling the knowledgeable were likely the minority, maybe I'm wrong, but either way education just CAN'T be a bad thing can it?

Thanks, XXX-er and sparkletarte.

shaggy, fees are not taxes. Fees are assessed in exchange for use of goverment facilities or services. Taxes are imposed on the citizenry, regardless of whether the payer is using a specific govt facility or service. Big difference.

If this event were held in S of the border on USFS land, the organizers would be required to secure a permit, pay a relatively small fee and, in all likelihood, present a safety plan as part of the permit application. Indeed, I doubt an event like this could get permitted outside an established ski area in the US. (Most western US ski areas operate on USFS land per permit).

IME, USFS regulation of organized events has not resulted in restriction on use by smaller parties (i.e., 12 or fewer). With a few exceptions, ski tourists are free to tour on USFS and national park lands. Restrictions kick in for some crowded areas in the busy (non-ski touring) season, but those restrictions are, IMV, reasonable and necessary to prevent trampling.

In other words, in the western US, one is generally free to be irresponsible and take on enormous risk on fed lands, with little or no governmental interference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eirikainersharp

maybe i overestimated in the stress of the moment. but it sure seemed bigger than other size 3s I've seen.

---

Completely understandable. I respect and admire you for lending your expertise to help people in need.

Govy is running a deficit right now they have had all kinds of cutbacks & layoffs SO licensing & insuring could be a nice little cashcow ,ICBC the government car insurance corp is nicely setup and ties in with existing licensce & registration of motor vehicals and the rcmp could enforce it all

I am not govy but I am deeply immersed in government culture up here ... all my friends,people I hang with,drink with , recreat with ,landlord ,roomies are either govy,ex-govy,have a partner in govy or retired govy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moose Pit

And people will poach, there are closures all ready. But every one knows there is no enforcement.

---

It's not about enforcement. It's about potentially deterrring morons from going places they shouldn't and officials being able to release a media statement when shit goes down saying "these people died because they had no permit, training and were sledding in a restricted area".

It's kind of like skiing permanent closures off the resort. Lot's of people still ski it, but if you fuck up and injure yourself or drop a slide on top of tourists, you will pay the piper.

I see sledders in most communities going the way of jet skiers on lakes. Most public places will eventually be restricted because a small minority will make such a nuisance of themselves that they get everyone banned. If I was in the sled community and wanted to protect my rights, I would be taking a long hard look at the bad apples and figuring a way to weed them out of the equation rather than crying about being slandered in general or pointing the finger at what everyone else is doing.

Skiers may do just as stupid stuff, but they get away with it because they are not operating a big, heavy snow eating machine and the number of skier deaths is relatively low in comparison. Skiers have also seen their access in jeoprody because of reckless behavior, so they are more apt to pitch someone shit who is obviously doing something out of the realm of safety.

Big mtn sledding is a relatively new sport and will go through some growing pains before the dust settles. I have lots of friends who sled ski and they approach it the same way they would go back country skiing. The folks who play it safe on sleds should step up to promote education/awareness in the greater sled community and potentially gain some respect for self regulating the sport rather than acting like a bunch of snowboarders claiming that everyone is out to get them.

Potentially a slippery slope but a solution to the sledding issue as I see it would be for the sledding societies (read: the guys who collect the grooming fees at the btm) to become more involved with a) checking for avi gear b) shutting their trail down when the risk becomes too high.

Lots of issues with this (what happens when someone dies on a lower risk day), but I could still see it being legislated in. They have the ability to do this (with government help). It will cause a major uproar but if it saves people its worth it.

I'm not sure how they could close down non regulated areas though (all forestry roads, etc) so if sledders were really determined they could go up there.

Hopefully this doesn't affect skiers...

powder, finally one of your posts that I agree with.

I couldn't agree more about most of your points. I and many others try to help the community & educate people.

I think you're right about the changes, I feel some need to happen & some that shouldn't likely will because of things like this.

btw, if you still feel I'm blindly defending, [ame="http://www.snowestonline.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2240832#post2240832"]http://www.snowestonline.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2240832#post2240832[/ame]

same user name on there.
It's a different discussion here in comparison though. What I want from the touring community is more cooperation which is a good thing for both sides, but until skinners can look at a sledder & see that it's just another guy who likes being in the backcountry, just like them, that won't happen.