SummitPost.org

Three skiers and one snowboarder died today in two separate avalanches in Washington State today. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/l ... he20m.html

Very sad. I wonder what their plan was in the backcountry. NWAC reported widespread natural avalanches all over the state on Saturday and more danger for Sunday.

I heard it on the national news today in Arizona. Some people can't understand the attraction when people go "out-of-bounds." Very sad ..

Airbag seems to have saved one person in the Steven Pass incident:
http://www.adn.com/2012/02/19/2326521/girdwood-skier-credits-airbag.html#storylink=rss

Very sad story. Just saw a report that said the skiers caught in the avy on Stevens Pass were supposedly in a "safe area".

Airbag saved the lone female in the group it sounds like. Saw a video of a boarder caught in an avalanche near Breakenridge that was wearing one of those bags-pretty impressive but at $700 a pop don't think I'll be getting one anytime soon.

Excuse me, NOT to make light of this tragedy ... but can you imagine how many people will buy one of these once the price goes down ...

Very sad news

Mammut has a new line of backpacks out too that I think have interchangeable inflatable devices. Its over $700.00!

http://www.mammut.ch/en/productDetail/261000011_v_0067_30/Ride+R.A.S..html

Another interesting article with the account of the one survivor:
http://www.adn.com/2012/02/20/2327695/sole-avalanche-survivor-we-werent.html
But based on her account, I don't quite agree with her that this was a "freak accident"--it was a significant risk that she and the others foresaw. Which is okay, if they didn't endanger others.

chugach mtn boy wrote:But based on her account, I don't quite agree with her that this was a "freak accident"--it was a significant risk that she and the others foresaw. Which is okay, if they didn't endanger others.

Yeah, but towards the end of the article she states :

"The cost, between $600 and $1,300 depending on the model, has been a deterrent to the acceptance of the devices in North America ...

"But it's very cheap when you're in the middle of an avalanche," she added.

Such backpacks aren't a license to jump into avalanche zones, Saugstad emphasized: "You still need to have all the knowledge and take all the precautions. But it's another tool that can help in an emergency."

So, she was in the right for having the right tools to complete the run, and she did have a vast amount of experience and knowledge.

Out of respect for the dead skiers' loved ones, I have tried to not weigh in with my opinions, but this woman's inane comments got my goat. From where I was sitting in my warm living room, watching storm after storm roll through dropping as much as 2 ft of snow in the 12 hours before these folks went skiing, I can't imagine how anyone with any kind of avalanche knowledge could fool themselves into thinking it was safe anywhere in the BC. The avy forecasts were extreme. The accident was not a freak accident at all. It should have been completely anticipated.

"You still need to have all the knowledge and take all the precautions."

The only precaution worth taking would have been to stay in bounds. Everything else; beacons, probes, shovels are just body recovery devices in this situation. Yes, it is easy to arm chair quarter back it, but you didn't see me out there. I didn't even walk the dogs the weather was so nasty. It sounds like this was a case of very good skiers thinking their skill and fancy backpacks cold outwit mother nature, rather than relying on basic avalanche avoidance tactics.

lcarreau wrote: . . . did have a vast amount of experience and knowledge.

Sometimes, based on these stories and the partners I've had who were later lost, I think the ordinary process of getting better with "experience and knowledge" doesn't work right when it comes to avalanches. People go out on questionable slope A, nothing happens. They do it again on slope B, nothing happens. They "learn" from "experience" that slopes like that are safe. But actually, maybe there was an unacceptable risk (1%, 5%, etc) on A and B. Maybe they were 5 lbs shy of triggering the big one--but a lot of times there are no cues to tell them they had a close call. This can lead people to draw a false lesson.

I think also that accessing the BC by skinning or booting gives the skier/boarder opportunities to make both casual observations about the snowpack, watch naturally released slides, 'feel' the snowpack underfoot, etc, as well as make more objective observations including digging pits, examining layers, snowpack structure, etc. Riding a lift and ducking a rope affords the BC skier/boarder none of these opportunites. I have to wonder if any of these skiers even looked at the avalanche forecast which was extreme.

Yes, it's very easy to "armchair quarterback" this one ..

This has happened before ... it will happen again. Humans will continue to push the limits. Nature, in the end as well as in the beginning, will
be as unpredictable and unforgiving as it always has been.

This story started rubbing me the wrong way, especially the "freak accident" part. If you can surf the internet, you can look on NOAA or NWAC and see that conditions were ripe. I'm sure if you dug a pit on that slope it would've make someone's hair stand up too. It was also strange that every news story went through great pains to explain how they were "highly experienced" or "expert". OK, so they were awesome skiers with the right gear. That doesn't automatically make them good at risk assessment and evaluating hazards. Everyone chooses their own level of acceptable risk in the outdoors and that is their own business. But calling it a "freak accident" makes me think those skiers believed the risks were minimal on that day. They were not.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Excellent Post!