WASATCH STOKE, CONDITIONS, OBSERVATIONS and ASSORTED DRIVAL 20-21

[tgapp]

I completely agree that 1) the gate should stay open, and 2) that people need to learn to take responsibility for their actions. Access to public land is the whole reason I moved here.

But consider this: in the last decade, there have been 10 ski/boarding avalanche fatalities in Utah. Three of them were at Dutch Draw. There was a fourth fatality there in 2005. So yea, given the concentration of tragedy on that slope, I do think it makes sense to try to prevent this from happening in the future if we can do so without impeding the rights of others.

Looking at the existing gate, it is natural to wonder what more can be done. They're opening a gate that has a skull and cross bones FFS. One thought, however, would be to list the specific fatalities that happened outside that gate in particular. Probably a total pipe dream bc I imagine Vail would vehemently oppose this. I do think it would center folks on the specific dangers of this gate and this terrain, as opposed to generalized BC warnings.


Attachment 357201

i agree completely. i also think that they should include face shots of the deceased memorial-style (family permitting) so that people can see that these were real people - it's harder to go by a picture than it is a block of text.

the 9990 gate should absolutely stay open, but i think that for most people, the skull-and-crossbones sign isn't taken literally; they think it's a cool thing to do, fun to take pictures with. it's not real unless they can put names and faces to deaths that have occurred in the very terrain that they are going to.

[Dshack89]

Main Chute by mid morning today?

Happy to report it didnt suck. I'm sure you guys had fun putting in the booter with the bottomless sugar snow.

[monkeywrenchMoose]

I completely agree that 1) the gate should stay open, and 2) that people need to learn to take responsibility for their actions. Access to public land is the whole reason I moved here.

But consider this: in the last decade, there have been 10 ski/boarding avalanche fatalities in Utah. Three of them were at Dutch Draw. There was a fourth fatality there in 2005. So yea, given the concentration of tragedy on that slope, I do think it makes sense to try to prevent this from happening in the future if we can do so without impeding the rights of others.

Looking at the existing gate, it is natural to wonder what more can be done. They're opening a gate that has a skull and cross bones FFS. One thought, however, would be to list the specific fatalities that happened outside that gate in particular. Probably a total pipe dream bc I imagine Vail would vehemently oppose this. I do think it would center folks on the specific dangers of this gate and this terrain, as opposed to generalized BC warnings.


Attachment 357201

Excellent idea, reminds me of that sign in the tropics somewhere that highlights the danger of a particular rip tide or swimming hole that has a body count in hash marks on the sign.

Vail wouldn’t allow it, but it could be posted just outside the gate on FS land?

But also agree with the fact that people need to take more responsibility for their actions. One good thing to come out of this death is that it seems to have spooked a few people in my extended circle into staying on low angle south facing terrain for the time being. How long that will last is anyone’s guess. Humans have short memories.

[TheK12]

Excellent idea, reminds me of that sign in the tropics somewhere that highlights the danger of a particular rip tide or swimming hole that has a body count in hash marks on the sign.

Vail wouldn’t allow it, but it could be posted just outside the gate on FS land?

But also agree with the fact that people need to take more responsibility for their actions. One good thing to come out of this death is that it seems to have spooked a few people in my extended circle into staying on low angle south facing terrain for the time being. How long that will last is anyone’s guess. Humans have short memories.

I can't remember what the signs says as I only remember the skull and crossbones. Does it explicitly state that people have died in that area? Is there a beacon check, like gates in other areas (thinking Whistler here specifically). When I first skied Canyons 10years ago, I went out there a couple of times without any avy gear being drawn in by other tracks, the mirage of safety because patrol was nearby, and the totally wrong attitude that if it hadn't slid with all those tracks, it was going to slide.... After I learned about the history of that area and learned more about the BC, I stopped going out there unprepared.

Why is that particular ridge so dangerous? Is it inherently dangerous or is it because it's near a ski resort and therefore has more people on it that shouldn't be there?

[Benneke10]

UAC staff was posted at the top of 9990 all day today. People were still making questionable choices.

Signs with the names and photos of the deceased might sway some people. In Washington, there is a sketchy river crossing on a trail I used to hike where the bridge washed out and has not been replaced. Very few people attempt the crossing now. A few years ago a local coast guard sailor died attempting the crossing, and now there is a sign right before you arrive at the crossing "In loving memory of Xxx Xxx" with his photo and it definitely gets the feels going.

[#######]

Image from the 2012 UAC report from a fatality in the same area.

[MitchPee]

I can't remember what the signs says as I only remember the skull and crossbones. Does it explicitly state that people have died in that area? Is there a beacon check, like gates in other areas (thinking Whistler here specifically). When I first skied Canyons 10years ago, I went out there a couple of times without any avy gear being drawn in by other tracks, the mirage of safety because patrol was nearby, and the totally wrong attitude that if it hadn't slid with all those tracks, it was going to slide.... After I learned about the history of that area and learned more about the BC, I stopped going out there unprepared.

Why is that particular ridge so dangerous? Is it inherently dangerous or is it because it's near a ski resort and therefore has more people on it that shouldn't be there?

I wouldn’t say it’s inherently any more dangerous than any other 9,000 foot E/NE facing slope on the outlier of an intermountain snow pack slope. There’s definitely some avalanche terrain favoring of that slope as far as undulation in slope angle and features that promote thin trigger points but all in all the main reason is people. It’s easily accessed and easily ridden.

We have these discussions in the dramatic event when someone dies or gets caught in an avalanche. We don’t have these discussions every time someone skis the line safely. Per capita, I’m sure that terrain gets ridden more than anything in the wasatch that is “backcountry.” All said and done the UAC has reached an immeasurable amount of people and has done a great job. With the amount of people participating in backcountry skiing/snowmobiling and the ratio in accidents I can safely say we have made immense progress. Tragic events will still happen but for sure our energy is better focused on figuring our texting and driving than it is in closing a gate that’s been there for years.

[Vt-Freeheel]

Huntington VT installed this sign to help stop drownings, up to 26 dead now. But it has made some people think twice.

[DryorDie]

Huntington VT installed this sign to help stop drownings, up to 26 dead now. But it has made some people think twice.

I remember seeing this as a dumb highschooler before swimming at triple buckets and it always spooked me out & the fact that my parents told us Never to swim at the gorge.

[telefreewasatch]

I wouldn’t say it’s inherently any more dangerous than any other 9,000 foot E/NE facing slope on the outlier of an intermountain snow pack slope. There’s definitely some avalanche terrain favoring of that slope as far as undulation in slope angle and features that promote thin trigger points but all in all the main reason is people. It’s easily accessed and easily ridden.

We have these discussions in the dramatic event when someone dies or gets caught in an avalanche. We don’t have these discussions every time someone skis the line safely. Per capita, I’m sure that terrain gets ridden more than anything in the wasatch that is “backcountry.” All said and done the UAC has reached an immeasurable amount of people and has done a great job. With the amount of people participating in backcountry skiing/snowmobiling and the ratio in accidents I can safely say we have made immense progress. Tragic events will still happen but for sure our energy is better focused on figuring our texting and driving than it is in closing a gate that’s been there for years.

^^^
Who you?
For your one post a year, well said.
Post more, please.
Look forward to your thoughts...

[frosted flakes]

I wouldn’t say it’s inherently any more dangerous than any other 9,000 foot E/NE facing slope on the outlier of an intermountain snow pack slope. There’s definitely some avalanche terrain favoring of that slope as far as undulation in slope angle and features that promote thin trigger points but all in all the main reason is people. It’s easily accessed and easily ridden.

Yep, I agree with this. I think the high fatality rate is largely because it probably has more unprepared skier traffic than any other backcountry zone in the state.

I don’t know what the answer is. The current signage is pretty intense already. I’d hate to see it closed, though that doesn’t sound like an option anyways. Even closing it on high hazard days seems unnecessary - there’s plenty of low-risk terrain up there, and people should be able to access that.

We have these discussions in the dramatic event when someone dies or gets caught in an avalanche. We don’t have these discussions every time someone skis the line safely.

DryorDie actually commented about the risky behavior up there on 1/6, and he got called out for virtue signaling. The accident happened two days later.

[Coño Frío]

The skull and crossbones, actually make it a little more “badass”...
Look bruh, I just skied the “extreme”


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[JKnight]

I guess the Asterix and Obelix cartoon was too cryptic of an answer to TFW's riddle. So how about using RACS (Wyssen Towers/Gazex/O'Bellx) selectively along the ridge? There are what, nearly 20 installed in LCC at this point?

[Benneke10]

I guess the Asterix and Obelix cartoon was too cryptic of an answer to TFW's riddle. So how about using RACS (Wyssen Towers/Gazex/O'Bellx) selectively along the ridge? There are what, nearly 20 installed in LCC at this point?

Not worth the $$$ to install them, especially since the area isn't part of the resort.

[oldskibum]

The image of a blue pretzeled victim recovered from a hard slab through trees sticks in my mind after decades. Plus we had already made two runs in the same area, before a little warming changed things. That brutal image on a sign might give second thoughts to some, of course not doable for many reasons.

i agree completely. i also think that they should include face shots of the deceased memorial-style (family permitting) so that people can see that these were real people - it's harder to go by a picture than it is a block of text.

the 9990 gate should absolutely stay open, but i think that for most people, the skull-and-crossbones sign isn't taken literally; they think it's a cool thing to do, fun to take pictures with. it's not real unless they can put names and faces to deaths that have occurred in the very terrain that they are going to.

[skiATL]

The skull and crossbones, actually make it a little more “badass”...
Look bruh, I just skied the “extreme”


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I think this is an important point. I've seen tons of gapers up there taking pics next to the sign, then going out of the gate on considerable/high days. There are so many warning signs and labels in our lives that tourists just see it as another warning sign to cover your ass. They simply don't believe the sign, especially when they look out and see people skiing it and get false feedback. They key is to get them to believe the sign. Some of the ideas above in regards to having names/photos of those who died are a step in the right direction, but won't solve the false feedback issue.

[schindlerpiste]

Right now, other than an "R U Beeping" sign, there is nothing at the lower gate. This should change. The "You Can Die" sign is at the top next to the 2d gate. I wonder whether there can be done more at the first gate (the one at the top of the lift) to better prepare people? Maybe a pass swipe? Maybe an actual gate that only opens when pass is swiped. This equates to a bit more effort. Maybe a sign that tells people that someone dies there just about every year?

I still like the idea of relocating the gate at the bottom of 94 turns.

[Iowagriz]

As an outsider and sceptic, why would the ski areas in the Wasatch want to make it harder to access the backcountry? Eventually, the feds or state will get tired of people dying and ask them to just take it over ("for public safety"). The end game is One Wasatch.

[MitchPee]

I think this is an important point. I've seen tons of gapers up there taking pics next to the sign, then going out of the gate on considerable/high days. There are so many warning signs and labels in our lives that tourists just see it as another warning sign to cover your ass. They simply don't believe the sign, especially when they look out and see people skiing it and get false feedback. They key is to get them to believe the sign. Some of the ideas above in regards to having names/photos of those who died are a step in the right direction, but won't solve the false feedback issue.

Having been 16 and doing exactly what you described in 2003 (taking pictures with the sign treating it as a joke), somehow through the latter years of alcohol and other substance intake I can still tap into that mindset of 16 year old on a pow day with a whole lot less people seeking out the white gold. I had zero interest in seeking out anything that would even begin to tell me not to go out there. Mix that with a sunny, windless, and some inviting tracks of others, and you get a perfect recipe for a potential fatality. Given the culture has changed immensely since then, that same mentality still will exist in people and they have to WANT to question if it’s a good idea to ride there.

However, it’s not the tourists that are dying. All 3 Dutch Draw deaths (which over the course of 15 years seems like nothing given what goes on in the backcountry) and numerous other incidents along the same ridgeline have been mostly Utah locals, with the vast majority being males and within certain ages of undeveloped pre-frontal cortex. So while I share your frustration at the goobers out there, if our goal is to save lives, I think we know where to look for a demographic, and it’s usually not Jerry Bernstein VP of venture capital in Brooklyn. Although he is the easiest cover to judge, and for all intents and purposes probably worthy of said judgement. But I think the context here is really important that things have been getting much better over the years. Having as few fatalities as we do for such a large population of skiers as well as accessible terrain speaks volumes to the radical shift in culture I’ve noticed since 16 year old me, and it’s easy to forget that given the fact that the human brain tends to remember negative powerful events (especially related to deaths) more strongly than non-events.

Thanks for the kind words Tele free Wasatch. Just another local Wasnatcher who loves to ski and usual yearly plans of work abroad we’re interrupted by the ‘Rona so plenty of free time and hoping to get out with more people this year.

[muted]

Maybe a robotic puppet that looks like one of the deceased victims could be placed at the gate. Like a halloween novelty, upon sensing motion near it it could talk to the skier walking by and say something in a creepy voice like "Be warned! You will die! Don't end up like me!' And then have it do a big cackle. if conditions are spring time safe, maybe change the message to him saying "All good bro, send it!"

Or to be more serious, you guys are searching for a solution that doesn't exist. I agree with Mitchpee that the big problem is the culture shift of skiing sketch shit much much more frequently. Which results in noobs seeing "sunny, windless, and some inviting tracks of others, and you get a perfect recipe for a potential fatality."

[HammySlapwagons]

Or to be more serious, you guys are searching for a solution that doesn't exist.

I disagree. Feel like there are a few solutions that won't entirely solve this issue but definitely would help. The biggest problem is getting Vail to do something about it.

[mar123]

Sad to hear this news...RIP to the victim and condolences to family.

Mandatory check in and a mandatory avy gear/check before you can even approach a PC boundary gate would be a good start. That should be standard procedure at all resorts. I believe Brighton and Snowbird do this?

[mall walker]

As an outsider and sceptic, why would the ski areas in the Wasatch want to make it harder to access the backcountry? Eventually, the feds or state will get tired of people dying and ask them to just take it over ("for public safety"). The end game is One Wasatch.

I dunno man, the implication that ski areas are in some sense encouraging (or at least not-discouraging) their customers to get killed in the bc in the furtherance of eventual resort expansion is a bit cynical sounding even to me...

Mandatory check in and a mandatory avy gear/check before you can even approach a PC boundary gate would be a good start. That should be standard procedure at all resorts. I believe Brighton and Snowbird do this?

Brighton does not, in fact Brighton is known for having one of the most lax gate policies in the area (virtually always open)

[skifishbum]

I dunno man, the implication that ski areas are in some sense encouraging (or at least not-discouraging) their customers to get killed in the bc in the furtherance of eventual resort expansion is a bit cynical sounding even to me...



Brighton does not, in fact Brighton is known for having one of the most lax gate policies in the area (virtually always open)

brighton posts the daily avvy and has are you beeping signs
occasionally you need to sign out at millie saying you wont ski back in from above if millie bowl is closed but your free to exit
id think at this point the 9990 gate shouldnt open unless yur beepin couldnt hurt and would weed out the i didnt even make it to the needing gear part
or make them go back to the car and git it
to git out
much like you dont ride sluschmans or hike the ridge at brig
unless youir potentail body finders on and functioning

[123ski]

There are very few areas like this in the Wasatch that require such little hiking from the top of a lift to access true backcountry terrain that also naturally funnels you back to the bottom of the lift of the same resort you started from.

9990 has it on both sides of the lift
GW has it off the left side
Maybe Scott’s bowl?

I’m sure there are a few others

The fact set I laid out above (easy access that funnels you back naturally) is what draws the inexperienced skier to go out the gate.

Knowing that areas like that are few and far between, wouldn’t it make sense that the resorts do avalanche work on that terrain before opening the gate?

And to be clear, I’m not suggesting white pine, wolverine cirque, grizzly gulch, rocky point, etc all need that same treatment. Those areas don’t meet the criteria I outlined above.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk