Avalanche deaths at Mtn. High

http://kdka.com/national/avalanche.wrig ... 38371.html

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/stat ... storm.html



And saw this: 2:51 p.m.: Mt. High skier trapped by avalanche rescued
Deborah Pfeiffer, Staff Writer
Article Created: 01/25/2008 02:50:56 PM PST

WRIGHTWOOD -- A skier trapped by an avalanche in Government Canyon outside the boundaries of Mountain High Resort was rescued today.

The skier, whose identity has not been released, is an employee of the ski resort. His condition is unknown.

There were three other avalanches outside of the area today, after the area received four feet of new snow in the last 48 hours, according to a spokesman from the resort.
 
“What they don’t seem to realise is that if they’ve been coming once a year, it means they’ve been skiing for just 10 weeks. They think they are experts, but the real experts round here are the ones who aren’t heading off piste.” http://travel.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif ... 209113.ece

From

An excerpt from an article about the avalanche deaths in Europe, 26 since January 1. Then there are articles of all over the U.S. Well, Darwin is alive and well. Sadly, survival of the fittest. To some it is worth the ultimate sacrifice. I respect that. Life is no bowl of cherries and some want to die trying to make it a bowl of cherries. I hope the pits aren't what they find? Who knows what lays beyond all the poweder and momentary rush. Hopefully some place where they ski all day long off piste in perfection. Somehow, I doubt it and doubt their loved ones will be enjoying such bliss.
 
CWHappyRN":28g57zsf said:
“What they don’t seem to realise is that if they’ve been coming once a year, it means they’ve been skiing for just 10 weeks. They think they are experts, but the real experts round here are the ones who aren’t heading off piste.” http://travel.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif ... 209113.ece

From

An excerpt from an article about the avalanche deaths in Europe, 26 since January 1. Then there are articles of all over the U.S. Well, Darwin is alive and well. Sadly, survival of the fittest. To some it is worth the ultimate sacrifice. I respect that. Life is no bowl of cherries and some want to die trying to make it a bowl of cherries. I hope the pits aren't what they find? Who knows what lays beyond all the poweder and momentary rush. Hopefully some place where they ski all day long off piste in perfection. Somehow, I doubt it and doubt their loved ones will be enjoying such bliss.
Click to expand...

Which doesn't necessarily apply to this situation, but thanks.
 
I think it directly applies. Someone went out of bounds in prime avalanche conditions to get some freshies. The same thing, do matter how it is denied. The patrol either was going along for fun, or rescuing. But, everyone has to decide when not to go, even patrol. People have to decide if it is worth the risk, the benefit/risk ratio or cost/benefit drill. I suppose one needs a certain amount of denial or lack of knowledge to take many risks.

Which doesn't necessarily apply to this situation, but thanks.[/quote]
 
Admin":2qxp9lvv said:
http://www.firsttracksonline.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3768
Click to expand...

That is a fantastic article that tells it like it is. As a matter of fact, the truth is what people are after in avalanche training, not saving face. The ski patrol is an organization of integrity that attempts to deal in the truth of events. People are human, get excited and go out of bounds when they don't know or when they know very well it is too dangerous and not worth it.

Some are unlucky and have no training. They follow along. There in lies the true tragedy. As a rookie I wanted to get some good snow, prior to having extensive avalanche training at Mt. Baldy. In my excitement I turned to an ex-patrol director standing next to me and asked to go up the chair and ski it. He yelled emphatically NO! It is too dangerous. I was simply lucky to be with this nice chap, wise chap. I was not educated at that time, had not retrained after a long leave after junior patrol. I then read the requisite books, researched and took more NPS classes, had more drills. Lucky, I was. Patrols' job is to protect, not facilitate cheap thrills that end tragically. My friend did his job well. He is a retired school teacher with lots of practice with knuckleheads like myself at that moment wanting to ski when it was too dangerous~!
 
CWHappyRN":ij01bbd4 said:
I think it directly applies. Someone went out of bounds in prime avalanche conditions to get some freshies. The same thing, do matter how it is denied. The patrol either was going along for fun, or rescuing. But, everyone has to decide when not to go, even patrol. People have to decide if it is worth the risk, the benefit/risk ratio or cost/benefit drill. I suppose one needs a certain amount of denial or lack of knowledge to take many risks.

Which doesn't necessarily apply to this situation, but thanks.
Click to expand...

“What they don’t seem to realise is that if they’ve been coming once a year, it means they’ve been skiing for just 10 weeks. They think they are experts, but the real experts round here are the ones who aren’t heading off piste.”

It bothered me that you seemed to have it all figured out when this was a fresh, developing incident. And that quote--were you familiar with the 23-year-old patroller's experience level when you reprinted that? That he was in fact a patroller. Edit: make that two patrollers.

People with avi training and all of tools can still get into trouble.
 
It really bothers me when patrol ski for fun and take others with them when it is unsafe. Perhaps, they can take their uniforms off. I don't like the denial about avalanche danger, it bothers me. It is OK to tell the truth. I have said nothing about anyone's ability or the circumstances. I do know that some need a denial about the danger and the truth bothers them. I am not required as a patrol to ever go out of bounds. Our responsibility is inbounds, period. Therefore, the person was not required to do that. Level of training is not the issue. Being a patrol is the issue. If you are inexperienced, you have to stay with experienced until you know the ropes. I did, as well as do all rookies. It is not fair to the NSP to have the irresponsible behavior however it was facilitated end in this. That is not our mission. If that bothers you you are not the first one. Live and let live. I have.

It makes people look sort of silly to go after that powder for all costs. Like Russian Roulette. I like it better when it has settled and the risks have reduced. Myself, I don't go out of bounds to risk my life, or for fun. To each his own. What is even more tragic is that a large bill will be sent to the individuals families for the search and rescue efforts, I mean very large. It is expensive and puts others in danger. If that bothers you, too bad. It is a fact. If I was so easily bullied, I would have never survived as a female patroller at 17 telling people to put ski straps on their skis that went down the hill at 80 mph hitting people, or get off the mountain. It bothered a lot of people. I guess IQ varies.

It bothered me that you seemed to have it all figured out when this was a fresh, developing incident. And that quote--were you familiar with the 23-year-old patroller's experience level when you reprinted that? That he was in fact a patroller.

People with avi training and all of tools can still get into trouble. It sucks but it happens.[/quote]
 
I got an alarming email last night that urgent help was needed because a patrol had died, named the chap and the age and the patrol affiliation. That means he was a patrol. I was asked to get up at the break of dawn, be ready by day break and search. That is how I know. But, then again, they could be just dreaming, sending spam, do ya think? just after the incident.

?????? We as patrol have to watch our own backs. Take Mammoth. If there was so much snow over the fumarole, don't you think the heat might change the quality of the snow and make it unstable even when you are told to move in? As a patrol you have to know when to disobey. It is life and death out there. No one will watch your back sometimes. Even in the military you can disobey with good cause. Not a leaders should be followed at all times. Excuse me, I expect more of patrol and so does headquarters, the organization as a whole has rules to be followed, liability and so forth. We are not supposed to lead others to their deaths, ski irresponsibly and ask others to ski responsibly, even pull their tickets for doing so and then trigger avalanches in our time off out of bounds with uniforms off. Is that any clearer? I don't know all the particulars. It could be a case of tragic misconduct that probably will largely go ignored. In the hospital we do not say accident any longer. The movement is to have the person take responsibility. If you are drunk and drive, it was not an accident that you crashed, rather expected occurrence. Hiding the facts does not help, does not help skiing as an industry or glamorize it. You can ski out of bounds at your own risk and for a large fee if you need rescue in most places. Not in other places, they prosecute.

I don't enjoy getting emails asking me to hunt for dead patrolers for any reason, joy ride or duty, it is not clear. But from the press??? Most of my friends would not go hunt for my sorry .... blank if I went out of bounds and got into trouble. I have heard directors refuse to go and hunt if people are going out of bounds. They chose to ignore signs. The US Forest Service looks at that point, not patrol. We are volunteers who don't sign up to die, regularly.
 
OK, this pissing match is getting old. :roll: Sometimes people die in avalanches due to their own stupidity and lack of experience and/or judgment. Other times it's just plain bad luck (witness Alex Lowe, for example).

No patrol director is going to refuse a rescue because the victim went OB, but it may be refused as a rescue effort would place rescuers in a situation of undue risk to themselves. By responding to that assertion I know that I'm allowing myself to be sucked in by random comments not having a darned thing to do with this situation, but I'm doing so merely to clear any misconceptions that may be generated by the discussion above.

We don't know if these victims sought out the necessary info or not. We don't know the avi report/forecast (but I can imagine). We don't know if they dug pits and conducted shear tests on the slopes they skied or not. If they did, we don't know the results of those tests and what decisions they made based on the results. The bottom line here is that not enough is yet known about these deaths to draw any reasonable conclusions. Until then, random stream-of-consciousness musings aren't going to solve anything.
 
Forget about it. I have taken to talking to patrol about it, patrols from all over the region who feel the same way ........... don't advocate dangerous skiing, and don't enable the crazies! They are on their own out there, the signs have said that for years. Case in point: Prime example just happened. Deny it or face the facts. We are not happy about it. Don't want it to be an example to follow.
 
Are there even avalanche forecasts for this area? This is a place that historically sees little to no avalanche activity year in and year out. This is an extraordinary storm and I can see how people got caught on this one. Same thing happened in Utah with the crappy early season snowpack, Montana and Washington have been suffering this year.

Pointing fingers and calling people irresponsible is bs.

RIP for the patroller and others killed in this event.
 
Are there even avalanche forecasts for this area? This is a place that historically sees little to no avalanche activity year in and year out.
Click to expand...
Not true for the SoCal mountains in general. When they get snow, they often get a lot of it at once. SoCal's 5% probability of 90+ inches snowfall in a winter month is as high as Aspen, Breckenridge, Copper or Telluride. Baldy has had several OB avalanche deaths over the years, and after many storms there is delay in opening terrain until the snow settles.

Mountain High is not as high or steep, and is more thickly forested. I've skied that Sawmill Canyon a few times myself, just as a means of returning to my car in the East parking lot from the top of West. With 2 of the deaths being patrollers, I'd certainly be more curious about the details. But I suspect it comes from one of the danger signs, Familiarity. These guys knew the terrain, knew that avalanche history was much more rare than on Baldy's more obvious exposures, and probably didn't test it adequately. Or it could have been $#!& happens, as when Mammoth bombed Wipe Out and Paranoid Dec. 21, and they still slid shortly after patrol opened them.
 
I always entered Sawmill from Goldrush at East; never really seemed like avi-susceptible terrain from what I saw, although I'm far from an expert in that dept. I understand the terrain elsewhere in the canyon is steeper.
 
Tony Crocker":1lqwsqxt said:
Are there even avalanche forecasts for this area? This is a place that historically sees little to no avalanche activity year in and year out.
Click to expand...
Not true for the SoCal mountains in general. When they get snow, they often get a lot of it at once. SoCal's 5% probability of 90+ inches snowfall in a winter month is as high as Aspen, Breckenridge, Copper or Telluride. Baldy has had several OB avalanche deaths over the years, and after many storms there is delay in opening terrain until the snow settles.

Mountain High is not as high or steep, and is more thickly forested. I've skied that Sawmill Canyon a few times myself, just as a means of returning to my car in the East parking lot from the top of West. With 2 of the deaths being patrollers, I'd certainly be more curious about the details. But I suspect it comes from one of the danger signs, Familiarity. These guys knew the terrain, knew that avalanche history was much more rare than on Baldy's more obvious exposures, and probably didn't test it adequately. Or it could have been $#!& happens, as when Mammoth bombed Wipe Out and Paranoid Dec. 21, and they still slid shortly after patrol opened them.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to make a blanket statement about the socal mountains. Certainly any area that gets enough snow can be prone to slide dangers. From what I have read about this area (no first hand experience), this is a spot known more for snowmaking than natural snow. That is why I posed the question do they do avalanche forecasts for that particular region? One of the patrollers was a friend of Mitch Weber from Ttips, his write up is heart wrenching.

I also can't buy the $#!& happens scenario either. Unlike the resort, they were traveling in the backcountry. I have yet to see an accident like this that you can't pinpoint what mistakes were made. Not saying that I wouldn't have made them, but there were certainly flags and warnings that they missed. Hindsight is always 20/20. The best we an hope for is to learn the lessons from these accidents so that we do not repeat them.
 
Des Rady was the local forest ranger back in the baldy area back in the 60's and did the best avalanche synopsis of these local mountains that still is extremly valuble if you can get your hands on a copy it is well worth reading.
 
SoCal Rider":2wd6w16q said:
And please, spare us your philosophical bowl of cherries and Darwin name-dropping.
Click to expand...
Wow! Hostile! It is America, freedom of Speech!
It hits a nerve. Just like work, we see death a lot. We do talk about it, maturely, without hostility. Some deaths are senseless and careless. No reason not to discuss those.
No one skis to die, hopefully.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top