Utah slide fatal

[CalG]

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2019/01/20/backcountry-skier-killed/

two feet....

damn

 

[Core2]

Looks like a pretty low angle slope with plenty of trees, the kind of place you might chance skiing during iffy conditions.

 

[dbostedo]

Wasn't buried all that deep, but it was enough unfortunately.

 

[RJS]

Looks like a pretty low angle slope with plenty of trees, the kind of place you might chance skiing during iffy conditions.

According to the Utah Avalanche Center report: "Two skiers went for a late afternoon ski tour near Electric Lake. They made at least one run down a low angle northeast facing slope. They ascended a ridgeline and for their last run chose a steeper northeast facing slope ... the part of the slope where these skier descended seemed fairly benign compared to the rest of the slope. It was 31 degrees in steepness where they started their descent. There was a short rollover that reached 37 degrees. Our perceptions of hazard can vary a lot, but the most important terrain factor for avalanches is slope angle."

Wasn't buried all that deep, but it was enough unfortunately.

The report also mentioned: "This is the third avalanche fatality this winter in the United States where the victim was not wearing an avalanche transceiver. Your chances for surviving an avalanche burial are greatly increased if you wear an avalanche transceiver."

 

[Tricia]

Looks like a pretty low angle slope with plenty of trees, the kind of place you might chance skiing during iffy conditions.

This, along with the fatalities of some "experts" in the backcountry skiing world it was keeps me from dabbling in backcountry skiing. I have enough voices in my head without taking these kind of chances. Where is the big chicken emoji?

 

[jmeb]

This, along with the fatalities of some "experts" in the backcountry skiing world it was keeps me from dabbling in backcountry skiing. I have enough voices in my head without taking these kind of chances. Where is the big chicken emoji?

To be fair... the slope that set the slide off was 37 degrees which is basically the sweet spot for avalanches. If you want to ski low angle, you need to keep it in the 25-degree range which gives you a few degrees of mistake before you're probably in trouble.

One thing that this report, and the recent Silverton incident has been a stark reminder of is the importance of slope angle and micro-terrain features. I was skiing an area yesterday that if you look on CalTopo or other shaded angle maps, nothing is above 27-degrees. Measured with a slope meter, easy to find isolated features in the 32-36 degree range which could easily trigger a slide.

 

[SpikeDog]

https://utahavalanchecenter.org/avalanche/43026

More detailed report than the SLC Trib link. The report noted several issues - no avy transceiver, keep your buddies in view, and even though the slope was only 31 degrees, the break occurred at a rollover of 37 degrees.

Agree with you Tricia - most of my in-head voices aren't too keen on backcountry forays.

 

[SBrown]

To be fair... the slope that set the slide off was 37 degrees which is basically the sweet spot for avalanches. If you want to ski low angle, you need to keep it in the 25-degree range which gives you a few degrees of mistake before you're probably in trouble.

One thing that this report, and the recent Silverton incident has been a stark reminder of is the importance of slope angle and micro-terrain features. I was skiing an area yesterday that if you look on CalTopo or other shaded angle maps, nothing is above 27-degrees. Measured with a slope meter, easy to find isolated features in the 32-36 degree range which could easily trigger a slide.

Yeah I was in an area last week that was like this. It was "all clear" according to CalTopo but I measured one pitch at 35 -- it was short and not convex or anything, but I definitely wanted to avoid it. Very good reminder.

 

[Analisa]

Re: trees, they have to be really freaking tight to anchor snow (enough that they’re probably not enjoyable to ski). I get that people use the absence of vegetation to recognize slopes that are super slide-prone, but they can definitely happen in tree-covered areas. And then the trauma potential is quite high.

 

[raisingarizona]

Tree islands and rock outcroppings often increase facet growth, that’s why you see a lot of crowns connecting these features. Islands of safety are often the opposite.

 

[newfydog]

Re: trees, they have to be really freaking tight to anchor snow (enough that they’re probably not enjoyable to ski). I get that people use the absence of vegetation to recognize slopes that are super slide-prone, but they can definitely happen in tree-covered areas. And then the trauma potential is quite high.

Here's one from Canada with a fair number of trees:

 

[SBrown]

I've been looking at lots of photos on CAIC's site and IG feed ... it's really helpful (I hope) in just getting your eyes used to the kind of stuff that slides. Starting zones, as mentioned before. I'm pretty visual so it is good for me. https://www.instagram.com/coavalancheinfo/ https://www.instagram.com/friendsofcaic/