Avalanche danger inbounds

[oldschoolskier]

Resorts can do everything right and avalanches still happen, skiers can perfectly assess the situations and still get caught in an avalanches. Both are based on what information they can see and measure.

What trips us up is what we can’t see or measure and in the case of nature, she’s a cruel and unforgiving one.

So it’s user beware understand you may be punished if you want to reap the rewards of the perfect run. If you can’t stomach the punishment don’t take the risk.

 

[James]

“The resort is classified within the ski industry as one of North America's few "A" level avalanche areas. It annually records the largest number of avalanches of any ski resort in the United States.”

^Talking of Alpine Meadows. Don’t know what year that was written.

Tragic Alpine Meadows Avalanche - March 31, 1982 | Tahoetopia

"We stared in disbelief. Earlier, we had found her boyfriend lifeless only a few feet away." Lanny (Johnson), a fellow patrolman, said into the snow: "Anna, is that you?" She responded, "Yes, it's me."Finding Anna Conrad alive was a miracle that helped overcome the sense of loss and ruin...

tahoetopia.com

 

[4ster]

So it’s user beware

or should it be “user be aware”

 

[Primoz]

Resorts can do everything right and avalanches still happen

That's something that I really can't comprehend (sure my Euro thing, with no "inbound thing" here, probably plays huge role with this). There are slides, and considering ratio of victims inbound vs. backcountry (if I got numbers right a while ago, about 30% avi victims in last winter were inbound, not to even mention this season), I would say pretty damn lot of them, yet everyone still take it as since it's inbound it's safe. I have no idea if it's just me being used to this, that once you step out of piste you are on your own, and you can never be 100% safe, or what, but I really can't stop wondering, why noone makes big deal out of it. Everyone (ok not everyone but lots of them) still ski without any gear and education in terrain where you can never be 100% sure it's safe, regardless what ski area's PR tells you. Regardless of bombing or any other avi mitigation, this terrain can never be 100% safe, yet everyone still consider it as such. And even if people would still think so, with that "let's go and sue everyone for everything for millions" attitude you guys have (nothing bad meant with it, it's just how we over here see this), I don't get it, how ski areas can afford marketing this as safe, when based on this, any single slide is their responsibility, and I assume it also means millions of compensation for anyone involved in that slide. Or do I get it wrong, and ski areas are actually not responsible if slide happens inbound?

 

[dbostedo]

That's something that I really can't comprehend (sure my Euro thing, with no "inbound thing" here, probably plays huge role with this). There are slides, and considering ratio of victims inbound vs. backcountry (if I got numbers right a while ago, about 30% avi victims in last winter were inbound, not to even mention this season), I would say pretty damn lot of them, yet everyone still take it as since it's inbound it's safe. I have no idea if it's just me being used to this, that once you step out of piste you are on your own, and you can never be 100% safe, or what, but I really can't stop wondering, why noone makes big deal out of it. Everyone (ok not everyone but lots of them) still ski without any gear and education in terrain where you can never be 100% sure it's safe, regardless what ski area's PR tells you. Regardless of bombing or any other avi mitigation, this terrain can never be 100% safe, yet everyone still consider it as such. And even if people would still think so, with that "let's go and sue everyone for everything for millions" attitude you guys have (nothing bad meant with it, it's just how we over here see this), I don't get it, how ski areas can afford marketing this as safe, when based on this, any single slide is their responsibility, and I assume it also means millions of compensation for anyone involved in that slide. Or do I get it wrong, and ski areas are actually not responsible if slide happens inbound?

The overall statistics for in-bounds and backcountry need to be couched by a couple of things. 1) it can be spiky, so looking at just recent events can be misleading. 2) there are enormously larger numbers of off-piste in-bounds skiers in the US, compared to backcountry. So the statistics, without adjusting for terrain usage, could also be misleading.

That said, here are a couple of graphs for in-bounds, versus backcountry skier fatalaties, presuming I got the category selection correct.

 

[mdf]

Thanks for taking the time to look this up, @dbostedo

 

[4ster]

I have no idea if it's just me being used to this, that once you step out of piste you are on your own, and you can never be 100% safe, or what, but I really can't stop wondering, why noone makes big deal out of it. Everyone (ok not everyone but lots of them) still ski without any gear and education in terrain where you can never be 100% sure it's safe, regardless what ski area's PR tells you. Regardless of bombing or any other avi mitigation, this terrain can never be 100% safe, yet everyone still consider it as such.

This IS the issue & I believe it IS an American thing. People are issued tickets and passes & set free with no expectation of even understanding basic awareness of the mountain environment, etiquette or skills. I don’t believe it was always this way. When I began skiing there was still a heavy European influence along with our own 10th mountain division. As a young instructor visiting the alps in the early 80s it was an eye-opener for me to see what seemed like 90% of the public were either in a lesson with an instructor or with a guide if venturing off the prepared piste, very few folks on their own just free skiing.

In the US, maybe only 10% of users ever take a lesson or seek any education. So even if it is snowing at a rate of 2 in./h and they are entering a possible terrain trap or any one of many possible hazards they have no awareness that something could go wrong.

 

[fatbob]

This IS the issue & I believe it IS an American thing. People are issued tickets and passes & set free with no expectation of even understanding basic awareness of the mountain environment, etiquette or skills. I don’t believe it was always this way. When I began skiing there was still a heavy European influence along with our own 10th mountain division. As a young instructor visiting the alps in the early 80s it was an eye-opener for me to see what seemed like 90% of the public were either in a lesson with an instructor or with a guide if venturing off the prepared piste, very few folks on their own just free skiing.

In the US, maybe only 10% of users ever take a lesson or seek any education. So even if it is snowing at a rate of 2 in./h and they are entering a possible terrain trap or any one of many possible hazards they have no awareness that something could go wrong.

Yeah Yurp is nothing like that now. I can only speak for my anecdotal experience but it's a number of countries x quite large number of years. There's plenty of unaccompanied off piste skiing and while clearly a lot of people know what they are doing which might be through peer education and pressure rather than "taught" - anything within sight of pistes is still fair game for dabblers.

It's just a human thing. People will quite readily drop lessons after 2-3 weeks, once they can "get down stuff" and stick on an intermediate or backseat plateau. Remember even among quasi alpine nations like Germany or France there are lots of skiers from the flatlands who do an annual 6 week holiday and are basically Jerry from Joizey.

The big difference is that people in Europe are kinda used to "there be dragons" cultural upbringing re off piste. Tourist parents probably won't be taking their kids off the groomers and therefore an idea does lodge that skiing is something you do on a piste. Snowboarding and the idea that "offpiste" is somehow aspirational* has done for that materially though.

* I mean obviously when it's fresh n deep it's great but often in Europe weather cycles can mean it's junk.

 

[doc]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but here is the latest on the Conlin v Vail case:
https://www.vaildaily.com/news/vail-resorts-prevails-in-appeal-of-taft-conlin-case/

 

[zag]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but here is the latest on the Conlin v Vail case:
https://www.vaildaily.com/news/vail-resorts-prevails-in-appeal-of-taft-conlin-case/

I came here to see where discussion on this case was too. Couldn't find much.

 

[James]

Pretty sure it was discussed years ago on epic. Might have to use google to search this site.
Judging by some comments on the Vail news article, appears locals did a standard cut through to access the trail. They blame Vail. I just don’t see it.

 

[LiquidFeet]

Check this thread out. It's nine pages long.

Jury Rules in Favor of Vail in Avalanche Death

This case finally went to trial, and the jury ruled in favor of Vail yesterday. (Sorry, I usually kept up with posting news about it, but was a bit of a slacker during the actual event.)...

www.pugski.com