• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Colorado avalanche death during avalanche course

Mike King

AKA Habacomike
Instructor
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
3,392
Location
Louisville CO/Aspen Snowmass
There's a lot in that report that is troubling. Like the fact that the group used the online data to map their route and yet there was a discrepancy between the slope data and the actual conditions. And that the difference was quite small -- 29 degrees versus 32.

In today's data rich environment, I guess it pays to resort to old school tools and observation.

Mike
 

SBrown

So much better than a pro
Skier
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 8, 2015
Posts
7,913
Location
Colorado
Very curious about people’s responses to the article.
 

Lauren

AKA elemmac
SkiTalk Tester
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Jun 7, 2016
Posts
2,610
Location
The Granite State
Very curious about people’s responses to the article.
Wow. That's a lot to unpack...

I'm not sure I'm prepared to unravel that many of my thoughts at this moment, but I am also very interested in the conversation.
 

newboots

Learning to carve!
Skier
Joined
Dec 9, 2016
Posts
1,367
Location
Catskills
That is (1) heartbreaking, (2) enraging and (3) hard to see a way out of it. With increasing exploding numbers of amateurs taking to the backcountry, the school must be doing more good than harm. But it needs to be done right.
 

locknload

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
1,621
Location
Carlsbad
Good piece. My frustration with the way we review avalanche accidents is our unwillingness to call out mistakes. Why was one instructor/guide that day so insistent on staying way away from 30 degree slopes while another was comfortable taking that risk? That's the big question I'm left with. There should've been a larger group decision process about terrain management with the a risky snowpack. I'm not feeling like that lesson has been internalized at the SAS school
 

pais alto

me encanta el país alto
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 11, 2015
Posts
1,981
Location
Good piece. My frustration with the way we review avalanche accidents is our unwillingness to call out mistakes. Why was one instructor/guide that day so insistent on staying way away from 30 degree slopes while another was comfortable taking that risk? That's the big question I'm left with. There should've been a larger group decision process about terrain management with the a risky snowpack. I'm not feeling like that lesson has been internalized at the SAS school
Rather than “call out” mistakes (which I think are obvious here) perhaps we should be looking at why the mistakes were made.

I‘m a little too close to two of the people (not the guides) that are mentioned in the article to offer certain thoughts just now.
 

newboots

Learning to carve!
Skier
Joined
Dec 9, 2016
Posts
1,367
Location
Catskills
Rather than “call out” mistakes (which I think are obvious here) perhaps we should be looking at why the mistakes were made.

Every time I take a deep dive into these avalanche disasters (from the comfort of my laptop), I come to the same conclusion. The wish to "do" and "go," and the deep desire not to be the wet blanket, interfere with prudent decisions. And despite the need for a huge dose of caution, things get ignored, left out, or forgotten.

In this article, the skier who died and his friend didn't want to spend their morning on safe terrain digging snow pits. They wanted to stretch their new avy training by going somewhere challenging.

"When the class split into groups for Saturday’s field session, Reed and Marshall joined Lovell’s party because they wanted experience planning and executing a more complex ski tour. 'We didn’t want to skin a half-mile in and sit there and dig a snow pit the entire time,' Reed says."

The hesitant skiers in the group who got caught in the avalanche were reluctant to raise their fears in the group. (I am under the impression, though, that exactly this is taught in avy safety programs - to urge everyone to speak up with their doubts. I could be wrong.)

Other red flags piled up but didn't change the plans:

The next morning, Dave Marshall, a member of Kobrock’s group, started having an eerie feeling about the day. His son, Pete, was in the other group, and Dave worried about the safety of their route. And George, who normally would go skiing or do chores while the class was in the field, was asked by Kobrock, just before she left with her students to dig snow pits, if he would hang around the lodge with a radio as a safety measure—something he’d never been asked to do in more than two decades of hosting avalanche courses at the lodge.

and

"A few minutes later, Lovell, hurrying out the door, told George that his group intended to ascend a series of short benches known as the Landry Sneak into Senator Beck Basin. It was the first George had heard of their plan, and he knew it meant two things: their terrain choice carried potential avalanche risk, and the two groups would be miles apart. George told Lovell he didn’t think it was a good idea. Lovell looked at George 'almost like I was speaking a different language,' George recalls, and did not respond."

The course safety officer met with the group headed to riskier terrain and reviewed the forecast, but did not read the more-detailed summary, which had a clear warning in it.

The most experienced people (if I read this article correctly), Sandy Koblock and Chris George, both thought it unwise to follow that route. Both responded to the idea, but inadequately to stop the less-experienced instructor from following through.

It seems that despite intensive training, a high level of skill, and a commitment to safety, the urge to get out there often wins, even in an avy training course. And sometimes with these tragic results.
 

mdf

entering the Big Couloir
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,299
Location
Boston Suburbs
It seems that despite intensive training, a high level of skill, and a commitment to safety, the urge to get out there often wins, even in an avy training course. And sometimes with these tragic results.
... even though they explicitly teach you about those mental traps. Which makes it even scarier and more tragic.
 

Ken_R

Living the Dream
Skier
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Posts
5,775
Location
Denver, CO
... even though they explicitly teach you about those mental traps. Which makes it even scarier and more tragic.

I have been in several Avalanche Training courses and workshops including AIARE 1 with about 8 days total in avalanche terrain during those courses. I always went in with the same attitude, if I see we are gonna get into sketchy situations its a hard NO from me. I dont care. Some of those situations you can prevent or foresee the day or night before when planning others you encounter out in the field. There are always options.

Seems like the situation the group in the accident got in is a case where they were threading the needle so to speak and was not blatantly obvious dangerous but still, sketchy. At least for me and my lowish level of risk tolerance. I can see many people doing exactly what they did and nothing happening. They rolled the dice and someone paid. Sad and Tragic.
 

James

Out There
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
24,980
This I don’t quite get. By “Avalanche terrain”, I assume they mean slopes over 30deg?

————
“I asked instructors what terrain they intended to use. Sandy [Kobrock] stated ‘we are not going to travel in avalanche terrain’ in the presence of Zack [sic]. I agreed with the decision and added my concern that under these conditions it is best to not travel in, under or on slopes directly attached to avalanche terrain. The instructors acknowledged.”
———-


This is pretty disturbing-
——-
Over the next week, old-guard SAS instructors called and emailed each other to see if anyone knew what had happened. Many familiar with the terrain around Red Mountain Pass were shocked to learn where the accident occurred. “From my kitchen window, I can see that bowl,” says Chris George, who converted an old mine into the St. Paul Lodge in the mid-seventies. “You’d get up in the morning and look over there, and by lunchtime there’d be fracture lines in the bowl. I saw hundreds of slab avalanches there.”
—————-
 

newboots

Learning to carve!
Skier
Joined
Dec 9, 2016
Posts
1,367
Location
Catskills
This I don’t quite get. By “Avalanche terrain”, I assume they mean slopes over 30deg?

————
“I asked instructors what terrain they intended to use. Sandy [Kobrock] stated ‘we are not going to travel in avalanche terrain’ in the presence of Zack [sic]. I agreed with the decision and added my concern that under these conditions it is best to not travel in, under or on slopes directly attached to avalanche terrain. The instructors acknowledged.”
———-


This is pretty disturbing-
——-
Over the next week, old-guard SAS instructors called and emailed each other to see if anyone knew what had happened. Many familiar with the terrain around Red Mountain Pass were shocked to learn where the accident occurred. “From my kitchen window, I can see that bowl,” says Chris George, who converted an old mine into the St. Paul Lodge in the mid-seventies. “You’d get up in the morning and look over there, and by lunchtime there’d be fracture lines in the bowl. I saw hundreds of slab avalanches there.”
—————-

Very disturbing. And just one of the examples of a series of poor decisions that led to loss of life.

The craziest part being, this is the Avalanche Training. How hopeless is the average BC skier or worse, the wannabe BC skier who knows far less than the instructor in the story?
 

4aprice

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Apr 2, 2018
Posts
992
Location
Lake Hopatcong, NJ and Granby Co
When my son moved to Colorado, he was interested in going back country and took an avalanche class up at Freedom Pass I believe. Scared the crap out of him. He'll ski off of Berthoud and Loveland Passes with some buds but really doesn't show much interest in heading out of bounds too much. Mostly spends his time in the terrain parks these days. His mom and dad are grateful.
 

Lauren

AKA elemmac
SkiTalk Tester
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Jun 7, 2016
Posts
2,610
Location
The Granite State
I think one of the issues we run into is that "mistakes" can be very subjective, as can risk assessment. Mentioned in the article: "Reed stayed in Silverton until a team recovered Marshall’s body on January 8, and he remembers talking with Lovell about what had happened. “At first he was, naturally, I wouldn’t call it defensive, but I think he was quick to say, Hey, our decisions were good,” Reed recalls."

This conversation may have been so shortly after the accident that he didn't have time to reflect on what had happened, or maybe Reed didn't quote Lovell properly. I would like to give Lovell the benefit of the doubt. But to say "our decisions were good" right after an incident like this...is a bit surprising.

The article has a subtitle that poses the question: "The accident highlights an industry at a crossroads and raises a crucial question: As safety schools boom, who is responsible for making sure the students come home?"

I absolutely think avalanche safety schools (and thus their instructors) have a responsibility to bring their students home. Safety schools should exercise the greatest degree of risk management. Students are there to learn how to be safe in the backcountry. I do not think an educational setting is the place to test your boundaries, or exercise excessive risk. It should be a place to gain knowledge, not experience.

Maybe additional checks and balances are necessary between instructors teaching the same course, on the same terrain. "Closed areas" should apply to everyone, not just one group or another. One of the reasons I say this is because of the halo effect. Any one of the students could have spoken up and said "I don't feel comfortable with this". But being in a setting where there is someone that is years ahead of you in experience, it's hard not to put a little extra confidence in their opinion.

The article mentioned that at least one outfitter in the area changed policy in the wake of this accident. I truly hope more backcountry outfitters and safety schools really dive deep and evaluate their risk management process. Maybe this tragic accident saves someone else from making the same mistakes in the future.
 

charlier

Fresh Tracks
Skier
Joined
Dec 6, 2019
Posts
618
Location
Seattle & Rossland, B.C.
These two articles might be helpful for discussion regarding safe travel in tithe backcountry.

The first article introduced a “strategic mindset” that was incorporated into the CMH operational plan during the 2000s and presented as an International Snow Science Workshop (ISSW). This presentation greatly changed how I approached teaching avalanche classes and safe travel in the backcountry. The article is long and the target audience is a professional cat-/heli-guide.

The second article is for recreational back country skiers. It introduces and explains how to adopt a recreational terrain mindset that that reflects an analysis of the risk factors and a willingness to limit exposure, and agreeing on slopes to avoid. The article addresses how to mitigate our individual personal human factors for safe backcountry travel.
 

locknload

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
1,621
Location
Carlsbad
Rather than “call out” mistakes (which I think are obvious here) perhaps we should be looking at why the mistakes were made.

I‘m a little too close to two of the people (not the guides) that are mentioned in the article to offer certain thoughts just now.
Call it what you want. WHY were the mistakes made? The article is stark. The very experienced guide said "now way are we doing that". The other, more inexperienced guide decided to go there and everyone interview disagreed with that choice but NOBODY said anything or intervened. That's a process failure. When people die, it's critical that the review process uncover the why and adjustments have to be made. The article didn't leave me with confidence that a more robust terrain management process has been instituted.
 

locknload

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
1,621
Location
Carlsbad
I have been in several Avalanche Training courses and workshops including AIARE 1 with about 8 days total in avalanche terrain during those courses. I always went in with the same attitude, if I see we are gonna get into sketchy situations its a hard NO from me. I dont care. Some of those situations you can prevent or foresee the day or night before when planning others you encounter out in the field. There are always options.

Seems like the situation the group in the accident got in is a case where they were threading the needle so to speak and was not blatantly obvious dangerous but still, sketchy. At least for me and my lowish level of risk tolerance. I can see many people doing exactly what they did and nothing happening. They rolled the dice and someone paid. Sad and Tragic.
I'm with you there. Its simple to me...no ski line is worth my life. I do understand the group heuristics lead to the mistakes and I wonder if class makes them more pronounced. For instance, if I'm touring my friends in the BC, I'm very comfortable saying "no way..I'm out.". If its a group of other skiers, its easier to feel that peer pressure that "I should do it or I'm holding everyone back". That's what makes the guide so key b/c...by default you put your trust in the guide to make good choices. Guides are human and they aren't perfect but it would be tough to say "no..I'm not feeling it" if the guide thinks its safe. Tough situation.
 

James

Out There
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
24,980
A) Very disturbing. And just one of the examples of a series of poor decisions that led to loss of life.

B) The craziest part being, this is the Avalanche Training. How hopeless is the average BC skier or worse, the wannabe BC skier who knows far less than the instructor in the story?

A) I can’t really assess that. I’d have to hear people who know the area and travelling in it better discuss it. From the quote by the guy who knew it, sounds poor though. Didn’t seem to matter what angle it was, he thought that bowl area was historically bad.

Early articles seemed to focus on a two deg difference in assessment vs reality. That seems a bit too fine distinction for go/no go. Maybe the obsession with slope angle caused them to ignore the general situation. That other guy just thought it’s a bad zone, not oh ok till 30, then danger.

B) Not hopeless. They actually followed experience. Without the guide they might have bailed.
 

locknload

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
1,621
Location
Carlsbad
I think one of the issues we run into is that "mistakes" can be very subjective, as can risk assessment. Mentioned in the article: "Reed stayed in Silverton until a team recovered Marshall’s body on January 8, and he remembers talking with Lovell about what had happened. “At first he was, naturally, I wouldn’t call it defensive, but I think he was quick to say, Hey, our decisions were good,” Reed recalls."

This conversation may have been so shortly after the accident that he didn't have time to reflect on what had happened, or maybe Reed didn't quote Lovell properly. I would like to give Lovell the benefit of the doubt. But to say "our decisions were good" right after an incident like this...is a bit surprising.

The article has a subtitle that poses the question: "The accident highlights an industry at a crossroads and raises a crucial question: As safety schools boom, who is responsible for making sure the students come home?"

I absolutely think avalanche safety schools (and thus their instructors) have a responsibility to bring their students home. Safety schools should exercise the greatest degree of risk management. Students are there to learn how to be safe in the backcountry. I do not think an educational setting is the place to test your boundaries, or exercise excessive risk. It should be a place to gain knowledge, not experience.

Maybe additional checks and balances are necessary between instructors teaching the same course, on the same terrain. "Closed areas" should apply to everyone, not just one group or another. One of the reasons I say this is because of the halo effect. Any one of the students could have spoken up and said "I don't feel comfortable with this". But being in a setting where there is someone that is years ahead of you in experience, it's hard not to put a little extra confidence in their opinion.

The article mentioned that at least one outfitter in the area changed policy in the wake of this accident. I truly hope more backcountry outfitters and safety schools really dive deep and evaluate their risk management process. Maybe this tragic accident saves someone else from making the same mistakes in the future.
Great post. Generally,, your decisions aren't good if you got a bad outcome. Actually...a lot of times you get away with bad decisions and get a good outcome (e.g. everyone comes home safe). That's what so scary about avalanche situations is how many times we ski a line or take a risk and then get a positive outcome and think, "I did it right"...maybe you did..maybe you didn't. The one way to virtually guarantee you'll come home safely is to avoid terrain with avalanche possibility even though that's not as exciting.

A few years ago when I was Catskiing up in the Monashees, I attended the guides morning meeting to plan the day. The Canadian guides are excellent and well trained and very experienced. When they went through their run list for the day, if they closed terrain that day, it was closed for ALL guides and guests. You weren't allowed to "open" a run that had already been declared closed on the fly. Conversely, you can always close a run if something doesn't feel right, like when we heard loud whumps in the snowpack as it settled. There was even a situation where one skier in the Cat ignored the lead guide's directions as to where we could ski and where we couldn't. He really chewed him a new one and told him that he endangered the entire group if he chooses not to listen AND if he did it again, he'd throw him off the trip. They took it VERY seriously. Still doesn't guarantee things go perfectly. The only person they said ever got buried was their photographer but they had her face immediately uncovered and got her fully clear in a couple of minutes.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top