- Posts: 913
- Thank you received: 1
The Kendall Trap
- Charlie Hagedorn
- [trumpetsailor]
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Elite Member
Today is December 19, two years to the day after the 12/19/2015 fatal accident on Kendall Peak. This week's weather holds exactly the sort of conditions in which I believe the Trap is most hazardous. For these reasons, I have published a draft of the document today; perfect is the enemy of the good.
Many people will be looking for storm skiing at the Pass in the coming week -- please choose your routes thoughtfully, rule out terrain before you leave the trailhead, deliberately stop to assess hazard when leaving protected areas, and choose routes that reflect the reality that others may be above or below you.
I've created a website dedicated to backcountry safety on Kendall Peak's west side: www.kendallpeak.org . Direct PDF link: " The Kendall Trap ".
I plan several refinements to the draft document. Your comments, in this thread or privately (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.), are gratefully appreciated.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- RonL
- [RonL]
- Offline
- Senior Member
- Posts: 259
- Thank you received: 0
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Charlie Hagedorn
- [trumpetsailor]
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Elite Member
- Posts: 913
- Thank you received: 1
Regarding 'extremely experienced':
From the NWAC accident report for 4/9/10:
Group Profile: All members were snow professionals with backgrounds as ski
patrollers, mountain guides, outdoor educators and avalanche instructors. Each member
had logged over 100 backcountry ski days.
Skier 1: Male. 27 years old. Level II avalanche certified. EMT-B.
Skier 2: Female. 26 years old. Level II avalanche certified. Outdoor Emergency Care (OEC).
Skier 3: Male. 26 years old. Level III avalanche certified. OEC.
Skier 4: Male. 28 years old. Level III avalanche certified. EMT-B.
To avoid debating 'extremely', I'll find a more quantitative adjective/description.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Lowell_Skoog
- [Lowell_Skoog]
- Offline
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 1460
- Thank you received: 16
A tiny suggestion: How about rotating Figure 8 so the reader doesn't have to tip his/her head to the right to look at it.
Though peripheral to your subject, I think skiing Kendall Trees on a deep snow, high traffic day provides enormous opportunity for parties to get separated in the steep trees, which could turn tragic if there was a tree-well accident (very easy to happen in that area with deep snow).
After my outing on 12/19/15, I concluded that carrying two-way radios in that zone may be a good idea. It's easy to lose sight of your partner as they descend in the trees, then follow the wrong track and get separated. We were yelling back and forth on a couple occasions that day after this occurred.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Charlie Hagedorn
- [trumpetsailor]
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Elite Member
- Posts: 913
- Thank you received: 1
I'm planning to rotate Figure 8's caption and page so that it displays well both in PDF-form and in print; it will take me a few hours of thrashing with LyX/LaTeX (#academicproblems). I wanted to get it out today .
I've constrained the photo-essay to the terrain above treeline, as it's specific to the location. Tree-wells were the suspected proximate cause of the 12/19/15 disappearance until the accident site was discovered. A tree well note would fit well within the 'coda'.
Radios are amazing (thoughts here ). Susan and I love 'em. With sufficient radio discipline, one can imagine coordinating inter-party movement with them; a topic for the future.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Randito
- [Randito]
- Offline
- Elite Member
- Posts: 960
- Thank you received: 1
There are a number of other areas around Snoqualmie Pass and indeed the region that face similar issues from popularity and high avalanche potential.
For example the nearby Red Mtn has killed a number of people in almost the exact same spot
media.nwac.us.s3.amazonaws.com/media/fil...n_fatality_final.pdf
media.nwac.us.s3.amazonaws.com/media/fil...tain_13_apr_2013.pdf
Also the entire "Alpental Valley" has been the scene of many fatalities over the decades -- Popularity and high avalanche potential are big factors here.
So I'm wondering about your thoughts on highlighting the hazards on Kendall vs a more general approach about the need to take into account the presence of other parties in risk evaluation and travel choices.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- CookieMonster
- [CookieMonster]
- Offline
- Senior Member
- Posts: 392
- Thank you received: 0
* It feels like you're holding back a bit in order to not seem preachy.
* If anything, I would go ahead and make it a lot more explicit.
* I did something similar for Union Creek, and, even though I'm not blogging anymore, it remains one of the most popular pages on my blog.
* This is classic middle ground terrain. From my blog post:
"Theory of Relativity
In addition to incredible ease of access, the backcountry near Crystal Mountain is middle ground terrain. This sets up a classic middle ground perception problem because Union Creek has a rather benign appearance relative to high alpine terrain. In other words, you can drive to the trailhead, skin from the car, but you won't see enormous snowfields below savage peaks. Instead, as mountain terrain goes, Union Peak is really sort of small, steepish, and extensively gladed. To this point, there are plenty of places that seem safe.."
avalanchesafety.blogspot.com/2010/10/union-creek.html
* The Kendall Trap is exactly this sort of middle ground terrain.
* It seems like a safer choice, but it's not safe at all.
* Computer modeling shows that Kendall has a statistical signature similar to terrain that looks absolutely unsafe.
* So we're just fooling ourselves if we think it's safer.
* EDITED TO ADD: Whatever my blog post says about Union Creek also applies to Kendall Trap.
* EDITED TO ADD: I love that you call it Kendall Trap, because that's exactly what it is.
I would be much more explicit and maybe do something to make people question their decisions to go there? ParksCanada has terrain maps that ask questions like "Why are you here?" and "Do you think this is safe?" and "Do not linger here."
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- RonL
- [RonL]
- Offline
- Senior Member
- Posts: 259
- Thank you received: 0
www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/mtn/securiteenmont...av-avterrain/cascade
I think mentioning the past incidents on the map or links to accident reports would be effective.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Charlie Hagedorn
- [trumpetsailor]
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Elite Member
- Posts: 913
- Thank you received: 1
To highlight Kendall is both to bring up an issue of personal concern and to provide a point of reference for discussion: "Hey, our local terrain looks kind of like that Kendall-Trap thing I read about once". If it gets people talking more about terrain, awareness of conditions in adjoining terrain, and awareness of others, then the photo-essay has done its job.
@Cookie/Ron : Thanks! As the document's header suggests, it is not intended to be a guide, only to highlight a confluence of hazard that may be underappreciated. I aspire to the 'show, don't tell' school; perhaps it is enough to highlight hazard. Accidents that strike those who are unaware of hazard trouble me the most.
A Parks Canada-style map for Granite, along with an enumeration of the many accidents, would be a benefit to the uninformed.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- alecapone
- [alecapone]
- Offline
- Junior Member
- Posts: 202
- Thank you received: 0
I have never visited Kendall, likely never will. Does get one thinking about simular home terrain, like you said. I can think of s few popular spots at Stevens that have skin/ski tracks that can get hit from above. Tye peak, west face lichtenberg...
Regarding the original accident, your comments in the other thread have me thinking about personal safety, and habits. More so, making oneself findable in the worse case scenario. If it does happen, someone is going to come looking. Make it easy for them. This doesn't apply to solo travel either.
Just bought a new beacon. Made sure my recco was still in my pack. Thinking about picking up a plb.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- SKIER-X
- [SKIER-X]
- Offline
- Junior Member
- Posts: 74
- Thank you received: 0
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- MW88888888
- [MW88888888]
- Offline
- Junior Member
- Posts: 125
- Thank you received: 0
I can relate this piece to a number of high traffic areas I frequent. I hope more folks really analyze the situations that went into those incidents you've brought forward here.
It only takes a little bravado and simple mistake to cause an avalanche that claims a life.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- kane2183
- [kane2183]
- Offline
- New Member
- Posts: 14
- Thank you received: 0
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- ron j
- [ron_j]
- Offline
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 1087
- Thank you received: 0
I thought I was pretty knowledgeable of that area but I had a couple of AHA moments while reading your piece.
thank you for putting this together... it is very helpful and will likely save some lives.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- heinzsd
- [heinzsd]
- Offline
- New Member
- Posts: 10
- Thank you received: 0
Good write-up and reminder of how easy it is to get lulled into terrain.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- snoqpass
- [snoqpass]
- Offline
- Senior Member
- Posts: 252
- Thank you received: 0
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- haggis
- [haggis]
- Offline
- Senior Member
- Posts: 255
- Thank you received: 0
Another take. We were out on the morning of your 1st accident in April 2010. Great snow BUT we were out really early before it warmed up. Powder in April, not something you want to be riding in the afternoon on a solar aspect. My TR noted this too and I got a lot of flack from folks over this one, certainly recall that even though we did not venture above the trees that day. I'll link that is I can find it.
www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...x.php?topic=16323.25
Thanks for the discussion, very interesting and thought provoking.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Chamois
- [Chamois]
- Offline
- Junior Member
- Posts: 132
- Thank you received: 1
I just got around to reading this. Thanks for taking the time to put it together and share with this community. We can all keep learning how to be as safe as possible and this provides a good example and context for a place where many of us have ventured. Cheers and stay safe.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- sprice
- [sprice]
- Offline
- Junior Member
- Posts: 66
- Thank you received: 0
One resource I find never hurts is to check out ski routes on Hillmap.com before I go, using the CalTopo slope overlay. It is a cheap and easy way to visualize the terrain and easy for many folks to grock than contour lines. I like to use it before I re-ski the old favorites to remind myself of the terrain issues I have learned to ignore...
www.hillmap.com/
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Don Heath
- [Rusty Knees]
- Offline
- Senior Member
- Posts: 314
- Thank you received: 0
I used to ski alone a lot. My wife would ask where I was going and am I going with anybody, and I would answer something like - Oh there will be plenty of people up there, I won't be alone. Definitely not true. Very occasionally I would legitimately team up with somebody, but more often it was comfort enough to have people near by. Well, close only counts in dancing and hand grenades as they say. Someone close is not the same as someone watching me, keeping track of me (and me them). Tagging onto what Lowell said, it's hard enough keeping an eye on a person you're with. Tracking a nearby solo skier? Forget about it.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- flowing alpy
- [flowing alpy]
- Offline
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 1272
- Thank you received: 0
the base area of the Kendall Trap today.
free parking on Alpental road, common
but sleds and snoshoes are not required.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- BCSchonwald
- [BCSchonwald]
- Offline
- New Member
- Posts: 17
- Thank you received: 0
I like your energy with this and have some feedback that I think will help contextualize Kendall in the history of avalanche fatalities of Snoqualmie Pass:
Since 1957 there have been 26 Avalanche Fatalities and several dozen documented near misses.
Sites where the fatalities have occurred are:
Source Lake/Alpental Valley- 12
Granite Mountain 6
Red Mountain 3
Mt Garfield 2
Silver Peak 1
Kendall 1
I-90 1
I think giving Kendall the weight for this one tragic accident does a disservice to much more dangerous areas in the Snoqualmie Pass area.
The 2010 accident when examined as a case study reveals evidence of wind transport in your photo making missed visual clues part of the trap that you refer to.
It really is the 'Honey Trap' where cognitive bias that allows us to see something attractive and overlook the threat. Barry Blanchard said it best when describing his failed attempt on Nanga Parbat,'It was like having sex with death.' The immediate pleasure discounts the looming threat.
I would leave out suggested terrain since it is off topic of your project and requires more attention to detail.
The Snoqualmie Guidebook uses the ATES scale to describe the different zones and when you look at Kendall, the Knob and Kendall Trees are the only areas that actually offers Simple terrain. Any terrain on the west is very exposed to avalanche hazard. The Swathe was a result of a 1990 avalanche cycle that created the Phantom so all the tree skiing with the open slopes above could one day become another D4 slide path.
Keep up the good work!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Lowell_Skoog
- [Lowell_Skoog]
- Offline
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 1460
- Thank you received: 16
Since 1957 there have been 26 Avalanche Fatalities and several dozen documented near misses.
Sites where the fatalities have occurred are:
Source Lake/Alpental Valley- 12
Granite Mountain         6
Red Mountain            3
Mt Garfield              2
Silver Peak              1
Kendall                1
I-90Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 1
I think giving Kendall the weight for this one tragic accident does a disservice to much more dangerous areas in the Snoqualmie Pass area.
It would be interesting to note how many of these other avalanches involved skiers. I'm guessing that if you omitted the non-skier fatalities the numbers above would be much smaller. So the notion of Kendall as an attractive hazard for skiers isn't such a stretch.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- snoqpass
- [snoqpass]
- Offline
- Senior Member
- Posts: 252
- Thank you received: 0
There was a slide around 2008 off Alta Mt into Gold Creek that makes both those look punyHappy New Year Charlie!
I like your energy with this and have some feedback that I think will help contextualize Kendall in the history of avalanche fatalities of Snoqualmie Pass:
Since 1957 there have been 26 Avalanche Fatalities and several dozen documented near misses.
Sites where the fatalities have occurred are:
Source Lake/Alpental Valley- 12
Granite Mountain         6
Red Mountain            3
Mt Garfield              2
Silver Peak              1
Kendall                1
I-90Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 1
I think giving Kendall the weight for this one tragic accident does a disservice to much more dangerous areas in the Snoqualmie Pass area.
The 2010 accident when examined as a case study reveals evidence of wind transport in your photo making missed visual clues part of the trap that you refer to.
It really is the 'Honey Trap' where cognitive bias that allows us to see something attractive and overlook the threat. Barry Blanchard said it best when describing his failed attempt on Nanga Parbat,'It was like having sex with death.' The immediate pleasure discounts the looming threat.
I would leave out suggested terrain since it is off topic of your project and requires more attention to detail.
The Snoqualmie Guidebook uses the ATES scale to describe the different zones and when you look at Kendall, the Knob and Kendall Trees are the only areas that actually offers Simple terrain. Any terrain on the west is very exposed to avalanche hazard. The Swathe was a result of a 1990 avalanche cycle that created the Phantom so all the tree skiing with the open slopes above could one day become another D4 slide path.
Keep up the good work!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- flowing alpy
- [flowing alpy]
- Offline
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 1272
- Thank you received: 0
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Charlie Hagedorn
- [trumpetsailor]
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Elite Member
- Posts: 913
- Thank you received: 1
It was never the intent to make the claim that Kendall was the most dangerous place at the Pass, but rather to point out that it is a place that is subtly-dangerous for those both savvy and risk-accepting enough to seek safer places while storm skiing.
Of the areas enumerated in the list of fatalities above, Kendall is the only place that I have ever regularly storm-skied. Avalanche hazard, access, or both rule the rest out for me.
I do worry that highlighting Kendall will draw more skiers to it, exacerbating the skier-density concern, but feel that getting active discussion going is worth that risk.
Thank you all for the feedback; it is all useful .
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- garyabrill
- [garyabrill]
- Offline
- Senior Member
- Posts: 464
- Thank you received: 0
1) Normally when one would ski Kendall is when there is a substantial amount of new or recent storm snow because of the old growth tree skiing. And as Charlie states the nature of the terrain changes dramatically at the top of the trees from being relatively avalanche safe to having the potential for great risk. Snowpack evaluation - and one would not likely dig any kind of profile - to make such evaluation below the top of the trees is essentially irrelevant for slopes above those same trees because of rather obvious wind effects but also solar effects.
2) Besides the aforementioned cross-loading because of the fetch of a west wind, the slopes above the trees as the angle increases become increasingly solar affected. That could mean a progressively harder suncrust with increasing angle, or at times when cold weather follows sunshine a faceted and potentially unsupportive weak crust (for adherence of new snow).
3) At certain times surface hoar could form on the open slopes above the trees and be covered by new snow. In either this case or in the cases above in #2 it might be possible to remotely trigger slopes above.
4) The steep slopes above the trees present a poor choice of terrain on many occasions when one might be expected to have chosen Kendall trees as a destination - when there has been substantial recent snow. For myself, having skied the area since the 1980's, I have only on two occasions gone above the top of the trees particularly towards the center or left of the main upper slope. There is no safe route above the top of the trees. Any route chosen has nearly continuous exposure to avalanche terrain. In addition the slope is large and if the slope releases the entire volume of sliding snow may come down onto a skier or group of skiers from above.
5) Over the long run one should expect that one's evaluation of stability will eventually be wrong. Although each stability evaluation may seem to be a good one, that will not be the case for all such judgements. The goal has to be not to put oneself in a situation where high consequences will certainly result in the event that one's analysis is wrong. When high consequences are possible one has to be extremely selective in exposing oneself to those consequences. There are times when the stability of the snowpack is a near certainty based on snowpack structure, and there are plenty of instances where the amount of sliding snow does not present a significant burial risk.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- NMaddox
- [Stuck_in_P-town]
- Offline
- New Member
- Posts: 31
- Thank you received: 0
5) Over the long run one should expect that one's evaluation of stability will eventually be wrong. Although each stability evaluation may seem to be a good one, that will not be the case for all such judgements. The goal has to be not to put oneself in a situation where high consequences will certainly result in the event that one's analysis is wrong. When high consequences are possible one has to be extremely selective in exposing oneself to those consequences. There are times when the stability of the snowpack is a near certainty based on snowpack structure, and there are plenty of instances where the amount of sliding snow does not present a significant burial risk.
YES!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- BCSchonwald
- [BCSchonwald]
- Offline
- New Member
- Posts: 17
- Thank you received: 0
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- haggis
- [haggis]
- Offline
- Senior Member
- Posts: 255
- Thank you received: 0
Also, can you go back to Freeskier or whatever you were before, the HFNC is confusing me.
Thanks
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.