12/26 Fatality on Pucker Face, just beyond the JHMR ropes

[jono]

By guy you mean girl, or ?

The whole discussion of ego as not being the right term for this dynamic was covered well on the previous page, and that makes good sense to me. It seems maybe too subtle to quibble over the terms, but it's important not to leave the impression that as long as everyone in the group stays humble they'll be safe; I think a careful read here says the opposite in this case.

On Sunday I was skiing inbounds and noticed essentially the same dynamics in a discussion of where to ski--obviously in a discussion that didn't involve avy risk at all and was all about figuring out where everyone would have fun. I'm hoping Oceanman and SM can comment on the similarity or difference here compared to the usual inbounds group decisions. Because if I'm reading you right so far it sounds a lot like the typical situation where people are focusing on not stepping on each other's toes, as we do when trying to reach a consensus about what sounds fun to everybody, what everyone is comfortable skiing, etc. Of course, one risk of side country is not starting off in the backcountry mindset, and it sounds like that was a major factor here.

The fact that we know larger groups are more apt to contain a dick or two is the exact reason people try not to be "that guy." Normal heuristic for a group: that which builds stoke avoids disagreement and fails at critical reasoning as a result.

Thanks again for the openness, guys.

[neck beard]

Another good post, CM.

"a little knowledge can be very dangerous". After a significant failure, it is just common sense to acknowledge that knowing how to do something is not the same as knowing how to do something the right way.

There are now beginner level avalanche course curriculums which contain valuable reality-check lessons on Avalanche Decision Making Competency. Part of these lessons highlight the continuum of competency as training and experience combine. An intermediate decision maker is described as having perhaps 10 days of total avalanche training (recreational level 1 + level 2) combined with perhaps 2-4 seasons of getting out at least twice a month each season for a total perhaps 80-100 days of applied critical avalanche decision making using the systems that you were taught in those 10 days of course training.

With a full time M-F jobs and 2 weeks leave a year, most people who make the commitment to accumulate that amount of combined training and winter experience feel that they are Advanced decision makers. Some even consider themselves Experts. I think that is being a little ambitious.

[spook]

i can certainly see why some people prefer to go solo.

[neck beard]

i can certainly see why some people prefer to go solo.

Besides the dangerous lack of mutual physical support in an emergency, so do I, but then conversely:

Due to circumstances, 80-90 of my 120 backcountry days each season are solo. This presents me with a difficult overconfidence emotional bias/problem when I get the rare chance to ski with an appropriate partner on a day when conditions appear appropriate for rewarding terrain. It can really scare me how much my risk appetite sky rockets.

[SchralphMacchio]

An intermediate decision maker is described as having perhaps 10 days of total avalanche training (recreational level 1 + level 2) combined with perhaps 2-4 seasons of getting out at least twice a month each season for a total perhaps 80-100 days of applied critical avalanche decision making using the systems that you were taught in those 10 days of course training.

No contest from me on this quote or the heart of Cookie Monster's post (relating to skill).

Instead I choose to point out that the vast and overwhelming majority of backcountry users that I have met, from Washington to California to Wyoming and Norway, are not at a level of what Cookie Monster would refer to as basic competence. The culture of continual re-education, retraining, and excellence in skill does not appear to be the norm unless I am touring with true professionals (observers, forecasters, educators). Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that survey data corroborates my anecdote as the current state of today's user group. Would you still stick to your guns that there is nothing that needs to be changed about avalanche education?

If it is the basics that the majority of accident victims are missing, and yet the bulk of these victims are products of an educational system that has reviewed these basics, then do we take a fatalistic approach to the victims ("it really is them, and not us, who are involved") or do we seek to find improvement in the system?

I'm not advocating so much for changes in what is taught, more so in how it is taught. And this is not intended as a point of shifting personal blame either, more so as a goal of improving culture and common practice.

[neck beard]

The culture of continual re-education, retraining, and excellence in skill does not appear to be the norm unless I am touring with true professionals (observers, forecasters, educators).

What matters a lot is what you do after your education. It is a real advantage to be involved full time in the business, but unrealistic for most obviously. However, weekenders can certainly imitate professional/operational habits in a recreational context:

1. You and your team (or just yourself) can use the avalanche bulletin and weather forecast along with recent data from reliable locals as primary inputs to your pre-tour hazard analysis. You can then come up with an "operational plan" for the day based on your expectations, considering your group and the terrain you will encounter.

2. Then when you are in the field you can compare what you observe (weather, snow, terrain) to what you expected and visualized pre-tour. With field observations you can attempt - only when prudent - to come up with your own on-slope investigation/verification of the hazard on that particular slope using your own on-slope data.

3. With that investigation/verification, you can modify your operational plan as required on-slope and use terrain to manage your exposure to the hazard - your risk.

Every day you go backcountry skiing, view it as an outing of an avalanche operational team (highways, mines, forestry, mechanized skiing, patrol, ski guiding etc). In your case, private ski touring. Be your own avalanche operation. Too often people see themselves primarily as a team of backcountry skiers who make avalanche decisions. Perhaps better to see yourself firstly as an operational avalanche team who makes decisions about skiing. Avalanches first, skiing second.

Do that ^ enough times and you will be amazed how your competency improves. Before I was ever involved in the industry I wrote out my own hazard analysis (avalanche bulletin) and operational plan, on paper, every single morning. Then when I came home, I reviewed how it went. I now teach beginner and intermediate courses.

There are no doubt many great support resources available, I certainly do not know them all, however in your research I seriously recommend that you buy a copy of a field note book called Decision Making in Avalanche Terrain. Amongst several good items, it contains a daily trip planning form which will support you in formulating a simplified hazard analysis and a decent operational plan [tour plan]. Then once in the field it guides you in what observations matter the most and helps you compare them in reality to what you expected over coffee that morning. It will not be entirely tailored to your being in the US, however you can consider the method and adopt as you see fit. I really recommend at least seeing how it is done in that school of thought.

The most important thing: if your buddies scoff or sneer at you for using a support system like a field book, then they are unwilling to acknowledge the nature of the risk and unwilling to discuss it openly in a common sense and equitable mature manner. Don't ski with them. I'd gladly ski a run with a weekender who skinned up to me one early afternoon and asked if I'd seen any activity, then wrote my answer in his notebook, then told me about a shooting crack he saw. It would be my privilege to encounter that opportunity more often.

[Hugh Conway]

An intermediate decision maker is described as having perhaps 10 days of total avalanche training (recreational level 1 + level 2) combined with perhaps 2-4 seasons of getting out at least twice a month each season for a total perhaps 80-100 days of applied critical avalanche decision making using the systems that you were taught in those 10 days of course training.

The question with all those experiences is where and when? It's easy to acquire days without much advanced critical decision making (particularly if you are a weekend warrior). unless your job is the mountains in some way every form of work drags you away for too much time.

honestly, I'm curious how much truly advanced decision making occurs. ex post facto rationalizations aren't advanced here.

[neck beard]

The question with all those experiences is where and when? It's easy to acquire days without much advanced critical decision making

True, and those days don't really count*. I've met some people with 200 days in the backcountry, but only ever on mostly low angle and nearly always a wind hammered melt-freeze literally bomb-proof snowpack with a 20cm storm every week if they are very lucky. And those people are virtually useless once they are avalanche terrain with a dynamic avalanche prone snowpack.

Days which count might include:

- days in avalanche terrain with people more experienced than you (mentored days)

- days applying a structured and consistent decision making system in Challenging or Complex avalanche terrain.

- days spent in a different avalanche prone snowpack to the one in which you usually operate.

They are valuable days of experience.

* note: a decision to ski in simple non-avalanche terrain appropriate to High avalanche danger is a good day of decision making from a planning perspective. And although it may not entail any critical slope-scale decision making, it should not be discouraged. Besides, days like that are great for investigating shooting cracks and other signs of instability with friends on miniature (12 feet high?) test slopes and cut banks in otherwise non-avalanche terrain.

[CookieMonster]

What matters a lot is what you do after your education. It is a real advantage to be involved full time in the business, but unrealistic for most obviously. However, weekenders can certainly imitate professional/operational habits in a recreational context:

1. You and your team (or just yourself) can use the avalanche bulletin and weather forecast along with recent data from reliable locals as primary inputs to your pre-tour hazard analysis. You can then come up with an "operational plan" for the day based on your expectations, considering your group and the terrain you will encounter.

2. Then when you are in the field you can compare what you observe (weather, snow, terrain) to what you expected and visualized pre-tour. With field observations you can attempt - only when prudent - to come up with your own on-slope investigation/verification of the hazard on that particular slope using your own on-slope data.

3. With that investigation/verification, you can modify your operational plan as required on-slope and use terrain to manage your exposure to the hazard - your risk.

Every day you go backcountry skiing, view it as an outing of an avalanche operational team (highways, mines, forestry, mechanized skiing, patrol, ski guiding etc). In your case, private ski touring. Be your own avalanche operation. Too often people see themselves primarily as a team of backcountry skiers who make avalanche decisions. Perhaps better to see yourself firstly as an operational avalanche team who makes decisions about skiing. Avalanches first, skiing second.

Do that ^ enough times and you will be amazed how your competency improves. Before I was ever involved in the industry I wrote out my own hazard analysis (avalanche bulletin) and operational plan, on paper, every single morning. Then when I came home, I reviewed how it went. I now teach beginner and intermediate courses.

There are no doubt many great support resources available, I certainly do not know them all, however in your research I seriously recommend that you buy a copy of a field note book called Decision Making in Avalanche Terrain. Amongst several good items, it contains a daily trip planning form which will support you in formulating a simplified hazard analysis and a decent operational plan [tour plan]. Then once in the field it guides you in what observations matter the most and helps you compare them in reality to what you expected over coffee that morning. It will not be entirely tailored to your being in the US, however you can consider the method and adopt as you see fit. I really recommend at least seeing how it is done in that school of thought.

The most important thing: if your buddies scoff or sneer at you for using a support system like a field book, then they are unwilling to acknowledge the nature of the risk and unwilling to discuss it openly in a common sense and equitable mature manner. Don't ski with them. I'd gladly ski a run with a weekender who skinned up to me one early afternoon and asked if I'd seen any activity, then wrote my answer in his notebook, then told me about a shooting crack he saw. It would be my privilege to encounter that opportunity more often.

This is a really brilliant post. I think these are especially important:

What matters a lot is what you do after your education.

Do that ^ enough times and you will be amazed how your competency improves.

Yes, exactly. And it really is an amazing change. You get into the right habits and the bad habits become so much easier to pick out. Planning, and getting into the habit of sticking to a plan ( except if you decide to turn around ) makes it so much easier to avoid the "silent" escalation of risk ( and the evaporation of margin of safety ) that seems to play a part in so many accidents.

[LeeLau]

What matters a lot is what you do after your education. It is a real advantage to be involved full time in the business, but unrealistic for most obviously. However, weekenders can certainly imitate professional/operational habits in a recreational context:

1. You and your team (or just yourself) can use the avalanche bulletin and weather forecast along with recent data from reliable locals as primary inputs to your pre-tour hazard analysis. You can then come up with an "operational plan" for the day based on your expectations, considering your group and the terrain you will encounter.

2. Then when you are in the field you can compare what you observe (weather, snow, terrain) to what you expected and visualized pre-tour. With field observations you can attempt - only when prudent - to come up with your own on-slope investigation/verification of the hazard on that particular slope using your own on-slope data.

3. With that investigation/verification, you can modify your operational plan as required on-slope and use terrain to manage your exposure to the hazard - your risk.

Every day you go backcountry skiing, view it as an outing of an avalanche operational team (highways, mines, forestry, mechanized skiing, patrol, ski guiding etc). In your case, private ski touring. Be your own avalanche operation. Too often people see themselves primarily as a team of backcountry skiers who make avalanche decisions. Perhaps better to see yourself firstly as an operational avalanche team who makes decisions about skiing. Avalanches first, skiing second.

Do that ^ enough times and you will be amazed how your competency improves.

I like this. It's simple and practical

[flyman683]

Good thoughts neck beard. All in, this is definitely at subscribed status, approaching sticky almost.

Speaking of group dynamics, amazing how civil we can be in this case and really have an opportunity to learn something. Thanks.

[neck beard]

I am glad people like the sound of those ideas. Just to be clear: they are not all my original thoughts. Some of this is taught in existing intermediate avalanche courses. And it makes sense.

[babybear]

Yes, I do think it's funny when people think I'm a dude. Most of you guys here have a sweet ski photo, boobies, etc for avatars-but I respect the guys that would respect a dude with a cute cuddly baby polar bear as an avatar haha.

By guy you mean girl, or ?

The whole discussion of ego as not being the right term for this dynamic was covered well on the previous page, and that makes good sense to me. It seems maybe too subtle to quibble over the terms, but it's important not to leave the impression that as long as everyone in the group stays humble they'll be safe; I think a careful read here says the opposite in this case.

On Sunday I was skiing inbounds and noticed essentially the same dynamics in a discussion of where to ski--obviously in a discussion that didn't involve avy risk at all and was all about figuring out where everyone would have fun. I'm hoping Oceanman and SM can comment on the similarity or difference here compared to the usual inbounds group decisions. Because if I'm reading you right so far it sounds a lot like the typical situation where people are focusing on not stepping on each other's toes, as we do when trying to reach a consensus about what sounds fun to everybody, what everyone is comfortable skiing, etc. Of course, one risk of side country is not starting off in the backcountry mindset, and it sounds like that was a major factor here.

The fact that we know larger groups are more apt to contain a dick or two is the exact reason people try not to be "that guy." Normal heuristic for a group: that which builds stoke avoids disagreement and fails at critical reasoning as a result.

Thanks again for the openness, guys.

I'd say generally skiers/outdoors people tend to be easier going, more likely to go with the flow, etc. Maybe this is one of the many root causes for some of these incidents?
I kind of like this 'Be a Dick' motto.

[babybear]

TC Search and Rescue seems to have a decent amount of funds (it seems like every other fundraiser in Jackson is for SAR- but of course we go to them all for SAR karma!) But wonder if they'd be interested in printing some stickers or adopting some new mottos to highlight the 'group element/ overstoked' factor that is becoming more of a factor in avi's recently?
One of my coworkers is on sar/somewhat new JH Avalanche board so I could ask if they have resources/ the need for a new creative slogan. They've had beer coasters in the past couple yrs that have little slogans like "Don't be the last one in for apres" but I think this Be a Dick thing could take on.

[homemadesalsa]

Weighing in late as we just got back from 3 weeks pretty much offline.

So glad to see this thoughtful conversation. I worked really hard with Schralp to bring about that article in TAR. Have been pondering the question of how to make a real shift in the decision-making of "experienced" groups. Seems from my experience that no-one wants to take too much time (eg 14 point checklists) but in real/ actual experienced groups there is a "no-bullshit" moment where everyone is completely invested/ involved, and all it takes is a shrug from one person that means "I don't like it," to choose another shot to ski.

I worked in circles around this in my editorial in that same TAR (http://www.americanavalancheassociat...blications.php ). It's like grade school math where the teacher makes you do long division and show your work until you get it right every time. Without the teacher present to check your work, you gotta have perfect protocols and enough self/ situational awareness to see what you missed, what is going on

It takes a lot of practice to recognize what are the important questions to ask for different situations; I think we are getting there by having the avalanche problem at the center of the discussion, but for many people, the concept of consequences is hard to grasp until/ unless they have experienced a close call or incident such as pucker face themselves, up close and personal. This shit is real.

[skifishbum]

This thread has been really awesome. Getting to sticky status.

Thanks all for the good and respectful discussion.

looked 4 ya after the ussws, but had to bail to thanks ya, for takin the time and havin the courage to get up tell the story, whatcha learnt, what others could learn or need to consider and
honoring your bro w/ these actions and words
both you and LA, who the mrs. and i have shared turns with gave awesome presentations
pretty stoked on the propsed avvy edjucation moving away from the cookie cutter merit badge been there done that into an enthusiast/professional aspects with continued ed seminars and separate companion rescue course.
Ive always felt group dynamics is the most important and hardest thing to really understand and it's effects on decisions and actions.

[TBS]

Timely bump SFB. Just got around to this issue on Thursday.

Weighing in late as we just got back from 3 weeks pretty much offline.

So glad to see this thoughtful conversation. I worked really hard with Schralp to bring about that article in TAR. Have been pondering the question of how to make a real shift in the decision-making of "experienced" groups. Seems from my experience that no-one wants to take too much time (eg 14 point checklists) but in real/ actual experienced groups there is a "no-bullshit" moment where everyone is completely invested/ involved, and all it takes is a shrug from one person that means "I don't like it," to choose another shot to ski.

I worked in circles around this in my editorial in that same TAR (http://www.americanavalancheassociat...blications.php ). It's like grade school math where the teacher makes you do long division and show your work until you get it right every time. Without the teacher present to check your work, you gotta have perfect protocols and enough self/ situational awareness to see what you missed, what is going on

It takes a lot of practice to recognize what are the important questions to ask for different situations; I think we are getting there by having the avalanche problem at the center of the discussion, but for many people, the concept of consequences is hard to grasp until/ unless they have experienced a close call or incident such as pucker face themselves, up close and personal. This shit is real.

Well said HMS. This was a great issue - your editorial was excellent. Hats off the Blase Reardon - Mr Magoo is a great metaphor for backcoumtry travel. And totally agree that it's hard to truly learn the necessary humility without up close experience - there's a lot of evidence about how poorly we assess Black Swan events. Great to see educators shift focus a little - prolly time to take another refresher.

Shralp, much respect for sharing your experience in TAR. Thought provoking and showed a lot of heart. Had to be tough on many levels. I hope you are finding some semblance of peace

[SchralphMacchio]

looked 4 ya after the ussws, but had to bail to thanks ya, for takin the time and havin the courage to get up tell the story, whatcha learnt, what others could learn or need to consider and
honoring your bro w/ these actions and words
both you and LA, who the mrs. and i have shared turns with gave awesome presentations
pretty stoked on the propsed avvy edjucation moving away from the cookie cutter merit badge been there done that into an enthusiast/professional aspects with continued ed seminars and separate companion rescue course.
Ive always felt group dynamics is the most important and hardest thing to really understand and it's effects on decisions and actions.

Thanks Dibbs, sorry we didn't get to hook up. Linda is a great person and the two of us talked quite a bit after her presentation. Maybe we'll all get some turns together this winter.

It was good to catch up with Bob Comey, Chris McCollister from BTAC, also homemadesalsa. Of course Kowboy, Tremper, Gordon - those guys are great. Hardesty too, great words.

That was my first USAW event, and I was pretty impressed. Great conversations at dinner and lunch with industry and educational leaders.

There are times that it isn't easy to talk about specific things ... For example, it's hard for me to talk to certain folks from BTAC and JH Patrol and thank them for their selflessness and putting themselves in harms way without tearing up. But if sharing my story and ideas helps move the ball forward in American avalanche education and safety, then I'm all for it. It's better to get some good created in the aftermath of our accident, than to be quiet and get nothing.

[skifishbum]

overall i thought it was good
judging from the show of hands i think the braaaaaappppppp demographic was next door buying guns n ammo
i wouda like to heard the pow mow instability presentation or more about the mnt accord over the save the highmarkers videos
i understand the importance of getting the bc safety word out to that group , but they sure spent a lot of time on a demographic that wasn't present.
the one thing i took from your talk that always strikes me as odd is the amount of creedence and decision making that goes into someones 1 word descriptive adjective of avvy danger.
low don't mean no and high doesn't make terrain change.
i wish they would just post the compass rose and not even bother w/ an overall daily rating.

[glademaster]

looked 4 ya after the ussws, but had to bail to thanks ya, for takin the time and havin the courage to get up tell the story, whatcha learnt, what others could learn or need to consider and
honoring your bro w/ these actions and words
both you and LA, who the mrs. and i have shared turns with gave awesome presentations
pretty stoked on the propsed avvy edjucation moving away from the cookie cutter merit badge been there done that into an enthusiast/professional aspects with continued ed seminars and separate companion rescue course.
Ive always felt group dynamics is the most important and hardest thing to really understand and it's effects on decisions and actions.

I don't really have anything of substance to add to this, so I'll just quote it and say +1. Wish I would have had the chance to chat with both you guys, but I ended up running into a couple people I hadn't seen in awhile as well.

SFB, I was sitting behind you, and was looking out for ya at beer:30, but must have missed you.

Shame about the scheduling conflict with the gun show, I was looking for a new touring-specific gat, and hoping to get two birds stoned at once. After all, there are a lot of porcupines in the Wasatch backcountry.

[adrenalated]

Nothing to add to this thread other than to thank Shralph for taking what must be an absolutely gut wrenching experience, and rather than shutting down, going out and sharing the experience and trying to help make avalanche education better.

[homemadesalsa]

Shralp, I told you this in person, but it's worth putting up on the board: so proud of you for not just what adrenalated refers to above:
"taking what must be an absolutely gut wrenching experience, and rather than shutting down, going out and sharing the experience and trying to help make avalanche education better."
but also for being brave with yourself, for owning the experience inside and then in public, in the TAR article, the Tahoe presentation, and at USAW. That owning of the experience is what gives you the gravitas to have people really listen to you, take seriously your suggestions and ideas, and ultimately for you to move beyond it more deeply. Thanks again.

[Tye 1on]

Thanks Shralp, for bringing your observations and insights to the annual JH Avi Awareness night this thursday-

link