Article on Powder Addiction avalanche death, and other cat skiing issues

[SBrown]

Very interesting article (although the title is kind of misleading)

The Inherent Dangers of Backcountry Skiing in Colorado’s Mountains

What can a fatal backcountry skiing accident on Jones Pass, on the west side of the Continental Divide, teach us about Colorado’s snowcat outfitters? And can these quintessential Centennial State adventures ever truly be safe?

www.5280.com

 

[François Pugh]

Go skiing in avalanche country when the danger level is considerable to high enough times and your luck will eventually run out. The more often you do it without consequence, the less likely it seems that there will be any consequences, but truth is the odds of severe consequences stay the same - considerable to high.

 

[SSSdave]

There are plenty of people that regularly year after year unwisely gamble the same way on highways, impatiently by emotional habit, passing other vehicles in places where they gamble there won't be another vehicle coming around the bend or coming over the top of a hill where they cannot see beyond.

One thing the article didn't emphasize was the attitude of many powder skiers to ski challenging steep slopes on resort slopes so not surprisingly when they go into the back country look for the same conditions as though that is all that matters. Numbers of such skiers embrace the slow turning higher speed terrain planing flowing style, enjoying greater forces just as is dominant in all the drop and huck skiing movies. When they are descending lower gradient slopes, they often don't turn much at all so it is easy to understand why they consider that boring. In fact most can't ski such lower gradient powder slopes making even medium radius turns because they hardly ever bother trying to do so, not interested, nor aware of why that can be viscerally enjoyable. To my benefit, they are also the least likely to ski dense trees.

There are always plenty of dangerous places in the back country even on generally lower gradient slopes due to terrain features for example steep walled small ravines, stream courses, and lee sides of buried outcrops so one needs to be aware of such dangers.

 

[Jwrags]

There are plenty of people that regularly year after year unwisely gamble the same way on highways, impatiently by emotional habit, passing other vehicles in places where they gamble there won't be another vehicle coming around the bend or coming over the top of a hill where they cannot see beyond.

One thing the article didn't emphasize was the attitude of many powder skiers to ski challenging steep slopes on resort slopes so not surprisingly when they go into the back country look for the same conditions as though that is all that matters. Numbers of such skiers embrace the slow turning higher speed terrain planing flowing style, enjoying greater forces just as is dominant in all the drop and huck skiing movies. When they are descending lower gradient slopes, they often don't turn much at all so it is easy to understand why they consider that boring. In fact most can't ski such lower gradient powder slopes making even medium radius turns because they hardly ever bother trying to do so, not interested, nor aware of why that can be viscerally enjoyable. To my benefit, they are also the least likely to ski dense trees.

There are always plenty of dangerous places in the back country even on generally lower gradient slopes due to terrain features for example steep walled small ravines, stream courses, and lee sides of buried outcrops so one needs to be aware of such dangers.

The issue with the car analogy is that cars have way more safety features to save help save you from your own bad decisions.

 

[Mike King]

They were skiing low angle slopes presumably below treeline:

On March 5, Tollund’s new forecast warned guides of “considerable” to “high” avalanche danger above the treeline; of “moderate” danger below it; and it rendered “closed” all “runs as well as any traverses that travel under/across exposed start zones.”​

​

But they failed to recognize that the slope they were going to ski was underneath another feature with a headwall steep enough to slide:

At around 9:30 a.m. on March 7, Hans, Spencer, Van Harte, and Ehren Samuelson, who was driving the cat, headed into the backcountry. According to the CAIC’s accident report, the guides communicated the risks to their group of highly skilled clients. “They knew the danger, and they wanted to go,” Spencer says. The guides skied with their clients in a way Spencer says was manageable even on that day. They stayed on low-angle slopes, “wiggle-butting” through the deep powder, and they did safety checks before they entered slightly steeper terrain. Nothing slid. Sometime after noon, they skied a run called the Funnel, and the snow was sublime. Then Hans, tempting fate, or perhaps failing to remember that it sat beneath a headwall steep enough to slide, suggested the group ski Bootpack, a run beneath Shipwreck, Spencer says. They all agreed. The guides and Hans had succumbed to what Dale Atkins calls “familiarity.”​

​

Tragic.

The article also seems to suggest that cat skiing is the Wild West -- some operations with really stellar snow safety operations, others not so much. Caveat Emptor!

Mike

 

[Noodler]

The article also seems to suggest that cat skiing is the Wild West -- some operations with really stellar snow safety operations, others not so much. Caveat Emptor!

That was my takeaway too. It seems that the industry is finding many challenges in policing itself. Looks like some government intervention may be required to really force their hand.

 

[scott43]

I would say the protection from litigation for avalanche and other skiing-related incidents in Colorado would not encourage better mitigation of those incidents.

 

[James]

The weird part is he was the last across the exposure. Did he go above their tracks?

 

[Slim]

The weird part is he was the last across the exposure. Did he go above their tracks?

I think It said the avalanche was triggered by cornice fall. But of course, even if that is not correct, with a deep persistent weak layer, the 10th skier can trigger it, after 9 others crossed without issue.

 

[Slim]

That was my takeaway too. It seems that the industry is finding many challenges in policing itself. Looks like some government intervention may be required to really force their hand.

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, some minimum training, equipment and staffing levels can be regulated.

This case, it seems like they were mostly doing pretty well on those points, except perhaps on putting aside paid time for snow study.

On the other hand, in a recent interview, AMGA guide Margaret Wheeler said “culture eats strategy for breakfast”, and I think that applies even stronger to regulations. Think of OSHA regulations, and how, in many businesses, the culture is to disregard or minimize certain of those.

 

[Noodler]

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, some minimum training, equipment and staffing levels can be regulated.

This case, it seems like they were mostly doing pretty well on those points, except perhaps on putting aside paid time for snow study.

On the other hand, in a recent interview, AMGA guide Margaret Wheeler said “culture eats strategy for breakfast”, and I think that applies even stronger to regulations. Think of OSHA regulations, and how, in many businesses, the culture is to disregard or minimize certain of those.

Ahh, but for the vast, vast majority of law abiding companies those OSHA regulations do their job. There clearly needs to be a "bar" set for compliance to at least a minimum level of safety protocols and a certification of the guiding companies to ensure they are doing their due diligence. As a consumer of this service product, I would expect nothing less. This story certainly has me re-thinking about ever doing a cat skiing trip.

 

[Mike King]

I would say the protection from litigation for avalanche and other skiing-related incidents in Colorado would not encourage better mitigation of those incidents.

I don't think the Colorado Skier Safety Act absolves cat operators or guide services from liability like it does ski areas. Anyone know for sure?

 

[Mike King]

Ahh, but for the vast, vast majority of law abiding companies those OSHA regulations do their job. There clearly needs to be a "bar" set for compliance to at least a minimum level of safety protocols and a certification of the guiding companies to ensure they are doing their due diligence. As a consumer of this service product, I would expect nothing less. This story certainly has me re-thinking about ever doing a cat skiing trip.

I'm not sure that regulation is the fix. But I do think that you as a knowledgable consumer should ask the cat operator about their snow safety program, training and certification of their guides, and their conformance to industry standards before booking a trip.

The place I go heliskiing is very serious about their snow safety program. When I started going, the former executive director of the Canadian Avalanche Association was their lead guide. All of their guides have at least their ski guide certification, and a number of them are fully certified IMGA or CMG guides.

It isn't possible to eliminate risk and ski. You can manage risk both by making your own good decisions, such as becoming educated about risk, choosing your skiing strategy considering terrain, snow condition, and proximity to medical assistance, and choosing your guide/companions.

Mike

 

[Noodler]

I'm not sure that regulation is the fix. But I do think that you as a knowledgable consumer should ask the cat operator about their snow safety program, training and certification of their guides, and their conformance to industry standards before booking a trip.

The place I go heliskiing is very serious about their snow safety program. When I started going, the former executive director of the Canadian Avalanche Association was their lead guide. All of their guides have at least their ski guide certification, and a number of them are fully certified IMGA or CMG guides.

It isn't possible to eliminate risk and ski. You can manage risk both by making your own good decisions, such as becoming educated about risk, choosing your skiing strategy considering terrain, snow condition, and proximity to medical assistance, and choosing your guide/companions.

Mike

I assume you do understand the problem of putting the onus of validating safety protocols being followed by the operator on the consumer. I wouldn't even know what to ask beyond the most basic safety concerns. This is why you need an agency that thinks through this stuff, assesses the best practices, and then develops and enforces the safety practice policies. I'm certainly not a "big government" proponent, but government is supposed to be "by the people, for the people" and is here to help us with situations just like this. I'm not saying that this would be the perfect solution, but this story shows that we clearly need something more. It would be great if the operators would be all in on the new program that was setup, but the story clearly states that isn't the case. That is really disappointing, but there may be other reasons why it hasn't been adopted widely.

 

[scott43]

And really can it ever be safe?

 

[Noodler]

And really can it ever be safe?

Of course there will always be inherent risks to skiing wherever you do it, but when it's a commercial operation, the operator must assume some responsibility. The level of responsibility they must assume should be managed and controlled by an external governance agency.

 

[mdf]

Absolutely safe? No. As safe as practical -- yes, it should be.
I agree with Noodler. As a customer, how would I be able to make an informed risk evaluation? (Well, other than obvious lapses that you are not going to see till you are already on the hill.) That's why we delegate to experts.

 

[James]

It’s difficult given that “experts” make egregious errors all the time, e.g. Loveland Sheeps Creek, this Jones Pass one, etc, etc.

 

[mdf]

It’s difficult given that “experts” make egregious errors all the time, e.g. Loveland Sheeps Creek, this Jones Pass one, etc, etc.

I meant the setting of standards by some expert group, not the day-to-day behavior of the on-the-hill experts. The egregious expert errors are horrible and newsworthy, but I hope the on-the-hill experts still make fewer mistakes than naive beginners. I want to ski with an experienced guide if I ski out of bounds.

Familiarity is a dangerous thing in any endeavor.

 

[mdf]

The fact that you schedule a backcountry cat or heli trip a long time in advance (and non-refundably) works directly against how you would want to structure things for maximum safety.