Avalanche:  Harsh lessons

Background: Dec 12-13, two avy fatalities. Two deadly avalanches. 3 snowshoers (not just one, but the whole party) caught "near" Artist's Pt, 1 snowshoer caught in Source Lk Basin following tracks set by a group lead by Mtn. Madness Inc..<br><br><br>YOU can help save lives.<br>&gt;&gt;. . . I am thinking about my own decision-making process. . . &lt;&lt; - markharf<br><br>IHMO Mtn, Madness had no buisiness leading folks up avalanche central in Saturday's conditions. It is hard, sometimes, to question our leaders and experts. Their job, after all, is to lead, but is it yours to follow? <br><br>Question authority. Not to pick a fight, but to better understand the reasons behind the decision. Help them revisit the decision and prove, not justify, the action to your satisfaction.<br><br>Never delegate decisions to others with out understanding them. <br><br><br>I fear that this weekend's avalanche fatalities could be the sign of a disturbing trend. The recreational industry wants to sell as much gear as possible. It is more difficult to sell an activity that apears dangerous or fool-hardy. I fear that the industries reaction to the sad events of this weekend will be to sell more avalanche beacons, or as I call them "corpse finders." It is a simple thing to buy an avy beacon, play with it a little, and feel safe whereas what is really needed is the training to be able to identify avalanche zones and route-find around them. Unfortunaley, this type of avy training is not something I see the industry selling in a box at the local recreation store.<br><br>I call upon all of you to educate your fellow back-country users, be they skiers, snowmachiners, snowshoers, or others. Promote avy classes that emphasise route-finding and safe travel. Help other parties make informed decisions.

Well put.

David Spring has written extensively on these topics of avi awareness, route finding, beacons, and group dynamics:<br><br> What's Wrong with Traditional Avalanche Courses?

Jhamaker, am I safe in assuming you were a member of one of the Mountaineers ski groups on Saturday? If so, were you in the group which turned back at Mushroom Couloir, or in one of the two which kept going? In case it is not clear, I was in a group which elected to keep going. I knew only a few of those present, and sometimes I find these internet-based alternate identities confusing. <br><br>As I stated yesterday, my own first order of business involves MY decision-making process, not that of our guides. As far as I know, all those present were previously judged qualified to lead Mountaineers trips in avalanche terrain (someone will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong about this). As such, I assume that all were comfortable making decisions about levels of acceptable risk, continually updating these judgements on the basis of fresh information, and acting on the basis of their assessments. I felt, in fact, that my guide consistently asked this level of involvement from all members of my group. In other words, I did not feel "[led] up avalanche central," as if against my will or better judgement. Rather, I felt invited to make my own decisions in concert with a group of similarly skilled, similarly empowered individuals. This was, in my view, much the point of our day in the field: to learn more about guiding and group process under stress. As such, I found it very valuable, and I hope to continue to draw on what I learned that day. In other words, this discussion is a part of an ongoing process which may result in making decisions differently next time around. <br><br>Since you (and perhaps others) seem to have concluded differently, I'd be interested in hearing more about your perspective. I assume that other points of view will help expand and deepen my own.<br><br>I hope I am not offending anyone in suggesting that this is not the time or place to judge those directly involved in Saturday's fatal slide. When in doubt, we might all try to imagine the effects of our postings on the friends and families of those involved.<br><br>Thanks,<br><br>Mark Harfenist, a.k.a. markharf

Mark:<br><br>I would love to debrief w/ you. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., 206-550-7543

My orig post accomplished a lot of what I had hoped it would - getting people to think hard about decision making in general, and avy risk specificaly.

My post, was, of course based on very incomplete info. Remember this is all just arm-chair quarterbacking.

Here is part of my debrief
I, myself, canceled a tip up Hood and moved my trip to the vicinity of Steven's Pass last wk-end after skiing Fri at Boulion Basin, Crystal.

Sat, at Stevens Pass conditions were easily twice as bad as any telemetry or forcasting indicated. The central cascades must have been in an unusualy intense convergeance zone. Just parking the cars I realized we had snow acumulation of over 4" per hour! My brain went into a tizzy - how am I going to find a fun and safe destination for a group w/ snowboard, randonee, and bc gear? I had already eliminated plan A, plan B, and plan C as too hard to get to and too exposed to avalanches. In the end we settled w/ a trip w/ plowed parking, minimal exposure to avalanche, and no fee. We followed the slowshoers (lot of them) up to Lanham Lk. A stealth approach to Jim Hill, through the trees and avoiding avy chutes was discarded as simply too much work.

Sun we ended up skate skiing in Leavenworth.

The trip destinations were dissapointing at first. We hauled all this technical gear and ironmongory in the hopes of at least getting in a great ski run. Now, in hind sight, I am happy w/ our decisions and thankfull for the flexibility of my party. I hope I can be as objective as this next time when (avy) conditions are not as blatantly odvious.

&gt;&gt;&gt;Unfortunaley, this type of avy training is not something I see the industry selling in a box at the local recreation store.<br><br>Actually, the last outdoor equipment store I was in had a flyer for level I and level II avy courses right at the cash register (and when I took the level I course, there was a lot of discussion of route-finding, not letting beacons change the risks you'll take, etc). But of course, it's up to the recreationalist to decide this kind of education matters to herself. I haven't noticed any warning label tied to snowshoes or skis, but I have noticed course flyers and good books at outdoor stores. <br><br>For my part, I have sometimes asked folks in the BC what they're thinking on avalanche as a nice way of seeing if they're thinking at all, but you can only go so far in raising the awareness of strangers in this kind of situation (very easy to get folks on the defensive, which tends not to teach much). <br><br>It would certainly be nice if the Seattle Times would say something other than "their family said so-and-so was very experienced and knew the risks" and would instead risk upsetting the family by saying instead "the hazard was rated as thus-and-such on the daily report at http://etc etc" and an accident analysis by this expert said..." - I've been somewhat depressed by the way the local press misses the opportunity to educate the public on the hazards and how to learn more about them.

jim_oker, I aplaud your efforts and like your approach to educating other bc users.<br><br>I would not expect a news agency to find the facts and give useful info. That would take time, and they have a deadline to meet. I imagine Paul B or another professional will come out w/ a report sooner or later. If we are lucky, (he) will post it or we will here more about it in Accidents in North Americain Mountaineering.<br><br>Saturday, I talked to a kid planning on skiing the clear-cuts on Mt. Cashmere.  I<br>cautioned him about avy conditions but he blew me off.      I wonder if<br>he was being obtuse or if he knew the area and was planning on<br>staying in barely covered clear-cuts w/o avy chutes above.<br><br>jim, I would like to hear some opening phrases you use to open the avy discusion when you encounter others in the bc.<br>

David Spring has written extensively on these topics of avi awareness, route finding, beacons, and group dynamics:<br><br> What's Wrong with Traditional Avalanche Courses?

<br><br>Thanks for the link- an interesting read. I would just like to echo one of his points about transceiver practice in a class setting. I took two of the avy classes offered at Baker last winter and in the second one (the longer, more detailed course), our last session was going through 3 example burials, on a real slope. <br><br>I know that I immediately appreciated the very distinct difference between finding a buried backpack on some gentle ground versus the potential chaos of an avalanche site. Although our group found our first "victim" within about 9 minutes, we didn't not find the second victim until about the 35th minute- and both had operating beacons. That KIA for me was certainly an eye opener and a class experience I was very thankful for..

jhamaker:<br><br>I am, perhaps, easily confused. I assumed that since you wrote so definitively in your initial post, you must have been one of those present last Saturday. I now see that this assumption was a rash one.<br><br>Since you were not present on Saturday and possessed at best "very incomplete info," why would you make categorical statements like "Mtn, Madness had no buisiness leading folks up avalanche central in Saturday's conditions...?" If your purpose is "Not to pick a fight, but to better understand the reasons behind the decision," why not ask for clarification (about, for example, "the reasons behind the decision") rather than issuing generic instructions (""Question authority...Help them revisit...Never delegate...") to those who may or may not need them? <br><br>I am sure that your stated goal, "getting people to think hard about decision making in general, and avy risk specificaly," is a noble one. However, I prefer not to be quoted out of context, and I am not comfortable with your apparent willingness to pass judgement (on me and others) without first attempting to collect a minimum of relevant information. <br><br>Thanks for listening.<br><br>Mark<br><br>

Actually, I think Saturday's accident illustrated a case where a beacon would have been a big help. I was one of the numerous rescuers out there probing all afternoon on Saturday, and there's nothing quite like being part of a line of people probing every six inches for 3 hours in a snowstorm to remind you what beacons were designed to do. <br>Yes, avalanche avoidance is better than trying to survive after the fact. I've read Spring's article and am all for classes, routefinding, humility, etc. But this was a case where a beacon might have done what it was meant to do - that is, help people find a companion quickly right after she was buried by a small slide. Would it have saved her life? Who knows, but it was a textbook case where it could have (because there were so many people around, only one person was buried, and the slide was small).

I positively concur with the last two posts. I was a member of the fully-aware and prepared ski party that broke the trail that day. As a member of Mountain Rescue I attached myself to my fellow responders and joined the probe line on Saturday afternoon.

jhamaker - regarding how I approach folks in the BC, it all depends on the situation. But a few general thoughts are that I start with curiosity rather than certainty. I also assume that they may know as much as or more than me and they may just have a different willingness to assume risk. <br><br>They may seem like they're being foolish or they may seem ignorant from outward appearance, but how can I be so sure? By inquiring, not telling. "What are you thinking about the avalanche hazard today?" "What route are you planning to use?" followed perhaps by "Wow, we're feeling a bit too cautious to do that today based on the snowpack right now." if that seems appropriate. <br><br>But to be clear, I don't get the chance to have this conversation very often, and when I do, it usually goes nowhere. Only in a few cases have people shown curiosity about how to learn more or where to go for regular avy forecasts or where to get equipment. If they don't show some curiosity or interest in talking, I'm not going to push it, as I don't know how to make that be productive. There's a great book that's relevant here called "Difficult Conversations" (subtitled something like "How to Discuss What Matters Most") - the authors make great points about how hard conversations can be when under the surface there are basic questions of competence coming up. If these aren't flushed into the open (tough to do upon casually meeting a stranger), then it's tough to make any progress.<br><br>Regarding the news media, I disagree that this is too tough for them. It would be easy enough for the Times and PI to have some standard info on file on options for learning more, how to get forecasts, and so forth - nothing that would kill a deadline. Part of their mission is public education, after all. Might even save a snowmobiler or two!<br><br>