Mt Washington NH 5/18-5/19

M

Mark Renson

New member
As I drove up Route 16 past Dana Place Inn after 3 hours of driving in heavy rains, snow started to fall! Like hell it ain't ski season! <BR> <BR> At Huntington Ravine Fire Road, the Tucks Trail became a pleasant hike on the <BR>smooth foot+ deep snowpack. <BR> <BR> After getting gear (including beacon, probe pole, shovel) together and <BR>strapping on crampons, I went up into the Bowl. I did much outreach to the <BR>light crowd of Pilgrims entering the Tucks ampitheatre, explaining to them that <BR>the avalanche danger was increasing as the snow fell and that the safest <BR>conditions were on the climbers left. Also, I informed them that the Lip was <BR>closed due to crevasses and undermining. Often, I would have a bit of a <BR>language barrier to deal with as it was Victoria's Day weekend which meant that <BR>there were several Quebecois that hopped over the border. <BR> <BR> I got chillier as the day wore on which frosted my toes and the weather got <BR>foggier. The latter was significant as it masked the fact that there <BR>apparently were some people that got caught in some sloughs that occured high <BR>on the Headwall - sloughs caused by the freshly falling snow on the frozen <BR>hardpack. By the end of the weekend, the month-to-date snowfall on The <BR>Rockpile would be up to 35"+ - average is only 10.8" and February of this year <BR>only received 27" !! <BR> <BR> That evening, we had a barbeque that we had planned .... in the gusty cold <BR>winds and swirling falling snow! Great weather for a BBQ in my book! <BR> <BR> On Sunday morning, winds howled and it was still snowing a bit. I did not get <BR>the warm feeling that we would have balmy temps and bright sunshine that would <BR>make for a corn day which I advertised to Dana on Friday. The weather inside <BR>of HoJos reported a minus 2F windchill at 6AM at Hermit Lake :-) <BR> <BR> I cramponed up to the Bowl for a repeat of the prior day and I was even more <BR>skittish about the avalanche danger which prevented me from skiing all weekend. <BR> In some ways it was boring, but I reminded myself that patrolling could have <BR>these types of days and I soothed myself by reminding me of the camaraderie <BR>that I experience up there, the beauty and history of Tucks and the fact that <BR>Forces of Nature were leaving us with great gifts in the month of May - <BR>Hillman's Highway has skiing almost all the way to the bottom, Dodge's Drop <BR>still has a good pitch, Left Gully, Chute are choked with snow (the latter has <BR>more now than it did a month ago), you can still ski over the headwall from the <BR>top and the East Snowfields are in great shape! <BR> <BR> Later in the afternoon after I did some practice with crampon footwork and ice <BR>axe arrest and gave a young climber some advice, I parked myself at the Lunch <BR>Rocks with Chris and Brian the USFS Snow Rangers. As we watched skiers, I <BR>lamented how I felt bad that I was not skiing but that I did not trust the <BR>snowpack given many factors (new snow, wind deposition, slope steepness, poor <BR>bonding to surface) and I remind myself that all that it takes is just one <BR>incident ...... <BR> <BR> Roughly one half an hour later with the sun brightly shining, we observed a <BR>skier mischeviously skiing his way from above to the top of The Lip, which is <BR>closed. We kept our eyes focused on him as this meant the possibility for some <BR>hi-jinx. As he cut through the powder, I thought to myself that this could be <BR>a good chance to witness an avalanche. He made a turn on the skiers left which <BR>triggered a slough. Somehow, this slough was just a bit too robust for comfort <BR>and had a sinister look to it as it poured over a crevasse and some brush <BR>poking through. As he crossed over the crux of The Lip, he triggered a living <BR>room sized slab with a crown that measured roughly a foot - OH SH*T ! This <BR>crashed onto the top of the virgin snowpack at the top of The Bowl below The <BR>Lip and whaddya' know, we had a problem. A bigger slab then released which was <BR>about 100 feet wide aimed for the Lunch Rocks and several people below - OH <BR>MEGA SH*T ! <BR> <BR> We screamed out AVA-LAAAAANCHE and stayed behind the rocks by the rescue cache <BR>yet in a position where we could observe so that we could see what "Sir <BR>Avalanche" (they command serious respect, dude) would catch. The smooth <BR>graceful exponential increase in speed of this slide was as beautiful as it was <BR>frightening. The soft rumble as it rushed by me roughly 10 meters away was an <BR>exceptionally pretty sound. But it also meant business as it seemingly had <BR>animate homicidal feelings. <BR> <BR> We were seiously worried about the people below us, especially since they were <BR>from Quebec and might not have understood what "avalanche" met. After some <BR>initial hesitation, they fleed to higher rocks, leaving gear behind. As I <BR>watched it finish it's estimated 1,200 foot ride falling 600-700 vertical feet <BR>to the floor of the Bowl, I tried very hard to spot anyone that might be <BR>caught. <BR> <BR> As it stopped, I heard a girl cough hard, obviously choking a bit on the blast <BR>cloud of spindrift snow. We all stepped down and screamed out for everyone to <BR>account for their friends (how the hell do you say that in French?). <BR> <BR> Fortunately, nobody was caught and our nice friends from the North thanked us <BR>for our concern. <BR> <BR> Meanwhile, the skier that triggered it, somehow rode it past Schiller's Rock <BR>(scene of last year's all-nighter) and skied out of it to the skiers right and <BR>into the bowl. Fortunately, he did not trigger another one there. Meanwhile, <BR>people from below were screaming out "thanks a lot, a##hole" to him. Later on, <BR>when fellow patroller Paul and I were having a bull session with the Snow <BR>Rangers, we lamented about how hard we had worked to inform everyone of the <BR>existing dangers and that The Lip was closed to all use. I am almost positive <BR>that I recognized the skier that triggered the slide and yes I did indeed <BR>inform him. <BR> <BR> You read this right - avalanches happen in New England, they happen in May and <BR>they happen in front of large groups of people which means that there is no <BR>safety in numbers. <BR> <BR> Just another weekend of drama on Mount Washington. Carter Dome's noble <BR>sublime peak with the lightly sugared conifers provided me with great eye candy <BR>on the early evening hike down to the bottom of Pinkham Notch. Gawd I love <BR>this scene! <BR> <BR> Get psyched form some good early June skiing. Ya gotta' believe !!
 
Any pix this time, Mark? They'd be especially interesting under the circumstances.
 
I was going to keep quiet, but you obviously enjoyed saying "I told you so" so much that I can't resist. <BR> <BR>You imply that everyone who seems to ignore the USFS & MWVSP warnings either can't speak English, or they're idiots. Obviously the guy you describe above the Lip was one or both. <BR> <BR>However, you've got to remember that USFS & MWVSP aren't the only intelligent life in the mountains. While 95% of those who continue up into the Bowl in spite of your warnings may indeed be idiots, some of us have the training, gear, and years of experience necessary to assess conditions ourselves. Those of us who volunteer in SAR work and have carried bodies off the mountain don't take this lightly. <BR> <BR>The USFS snow rangers, with assistance from selfless volunteers like yourself, have an awesome responsibility to reduce or prevent injuries and deaths, to themselves as well as the public. This would be simple if no one ever went up in the Ravine, then no one would ever get injured. Avalanche is only one of the many dangers, and "safe" is a relative term up there. <BR> <BR>The morning AV conditions report is almost always based on yesterday's first-hand observations, the OBS worst-case weather forecast scenarios of what might have happened overnight, and a long-distance look through binoculars. On the basis of this, the public is often advised not to go up in the Ravine, before any snow ranger has risked hiking up there to evaluate it first-hand. On many occasions, I wouldn't even consider going up there. On others, I've gone up to check it out and found conditions as bad as predicted, and headed back down. However, on a few occasions in the past couple years, I've also found first-hand that the morning AV report had understandably overstated the risk, for the reasons above. I have heard Brad Ray admit that the Right Gully "looks pretty stable to me" once he got up there, after the MWVSP had talked a dozen or more skiers into turning around at HoJos. <BR> <BR>This is why it's an "advisory". Your outreach & education are invaluable, and enlighten countless clueless individuals every year. Keep up the good work, and try to not insult the 5% of us who may actually know what we're doing.
 
considering the section being skied by the reckless skier was listed as being 'closed' and for seemingly obvious reason, i think an 'i told you so' point of view is appropriate in this case. however, i don't think the story submitted above was an 'i told you so story', nor do i think it sounded particularly insulting to the highly trained and skilled outback professionals (then again, i'm not one of those people, so what do i know... just sharing perspective, that's all). <BR> <BR>warnings are just that. they're not called absolute truth. i would be willing to guess a lot of people go to tucks not even checking recent AV conditions, despite their availability from numerous sources. it's the people that aren't experts those warnings are guaged at, and most of us are not experts. take it with a grain of salt and make your own evaluation if you are confident in your abilities to do so. <BR> <BR>the important thing here is A) no one got hurt, and B) hopefully someone learned from someone elses mistake and a future incident was averted before it happened. thanks for the write up mark, both today and all season long... superb job.
 
Dear Anonymous, <BR> <BR>Lay off the acid! There's no "I told you so" air to Ranger Renson's report. I don't know where you get the bit about that Renson implied that the avalanche triggerer probably couldn't speak English. <BR> <BR>Furthermore there was no warning or advisory regarding skiing The Lip. <BR> <BR>Rather USFS "law": The Lip is CLOSED. To hikers, skiers, to everyone. <BR> <BR>By rights the USFS should have hauled that idiot to the sheriff and charged him with reckless endangerment.
 
John and River, thanx for your defense. <BR> <BR>At the same time, after re-reading my post a few times, I could perhaps see where "anonymous" (whoever he/she is) is coming from and how my post might be interpreted as "I told you so". If you look down towards the bottom, you could see where I mentioned "how hard we had worked to <BR>inform everyone of the existing dangers and that <BR>The Lip was closed to all use. I am almost positive that I recognized the skier that <BR>triggered the slide and yes I did indeed inform <BR>him". I only typed this as it was an account of the day and I had mentioned this as part of a casual conversation. I never intended this report to be an "I told you so" report, merely an account of an interesting weekend and hopefully as a reminded to the inexperienced as to what happened. Also in my defense, I wrote this late at night and was tired and probably a bit careless in my composition. <BR> <BR>As for insulting the 5% and the implication everyone who seems to ignore the USFS & MWVSP warnings either can't speak English or they're idiots, ummm, I never intended to insult anyone and I cannot see how my report did insult the 5%ers and/or imply idiocy. I apologize if I somehow did. <BR> <BR>"Anonymous", I would be intrested in hearing from you. You inferred that you're part of an SAR team and given that, some constructive input here could be of great value. What SAR org are you a part of? Plus you do have my e-Mail address. <BR> <BR>Folks let's all make this constructive and not turn this into some pathetic juvenile "internet web dork" flame-war. I am confident that "Anonymous" could provide us with some good inputs. Thank you.
 
Ok, I was a bit aggressive. Sorry Anonymous. <BR> <BR>Out of curiosity, though, could someone hypothetically be prosecuted for reckless endangerment for ignoring a trail closing and triggering an avalanche? <BR> <BR>What if someone had been injured or killed? <BR> <BR>Are there any laws similar to vehicular homicide that might apply?
 
Ain't no lawyer, don't play one on TV, but theoretically it's possible, but would require a significant burden of proof that the guy was aware that his behavior was dangerous to others and that he acted in reckless disregard despite that knowledge. (Look up Nathan Hall on your favorite search engine to find a case where negligent homicide was indeed the finding against a skier who killed somebody while skiing out of control at Vail.) Possible, but not likely. <BR> <BR>But still, 'twas a stupid thing to do. I don't have a problem with the USFS closing particular hazards if it means that USFS personnel will be put in danger either by rescue efforts or directly from the activities in question. This is certainly more of an issue at Tuckerman than many other places, in that it is A: Easily accessable and very popular amongst the mountianeering-ignorant. B: It's very popularity increases the risk to others when somebody does something ill-advised like skiing slabs on the Lip right after a storm. <BR> <BR>Were he risking only his own butt, I'd be more likely to buy into the "live free or die" ethic like the guys who risked it and died on St. Elias recently. But when literally dozens of other people are placed in harms way, it becomes more than just his business. <BR> <BR>And if he had done his own avi-assessment based on what was in front of him, he obviously got it wrong, intelligent life-form or not. Nobody is perfect, and all of the avalanche experts are dead (in avalanches). But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to predict that the possiblity of avalache on that day was much higher than it is likely to be this coming weekend (after big freeze/thaw cycles). Closing the Lip is a reasonble, responsible, and prudent thing to do at times. The clueless are people too.
 
i'm not an expert here either, but with a B.S. in CJ and having taken a criminal law class i have some background, and i'll venture forth my thoughts: <BR> <BR>if such an accident resulted in a death and the legal system became involved, the criminal charge would be Involuntary Manslaghter, which essentially means murder without intent (which is a lesser charge than felony murder). <BR> <BR>i think a criminal conviction would be hard to prove with a jury. the first aspect is that the acused would have caused the death by commiting a minor offense (e.g. you can't get manslaughter for accidently hitting a another car and killing someone if you were in a skid - no vehicular infraction; however if you were speeding/drinking/etc. and killed someone, there's your vehicular homicide). if the lip was listed as closed and the acused was told this, then this part of proof is settled. <BR> <BR>the required proof of guilt would then have to be that harm was the natural and probable result of the wrong committed by the acused. this is debatable and probably would depend on the extent of death/injury caused and expert testimony on the level of the warnings and likely consequences. i do not believe that the acused would nesicarily need to have known that death was the likely result of his actions; i think that would fall to precident/expert witness. <BR> <BR>that's the big problem there, there is no precident which the legal system relies heavily on. the Hall case might offer a connection, but different context (drunk/out of control vs. aware/skiing closed trail). <BR> <BR>however, the old civil suite would probably work and the guy could own restitution to the victims for damages.
 
Mark, <BR>Stefan here from the Crabbe Mtn. Ski Patrol, Canada. Myself and 5 others in my crew were in Tuckerman Ravine on Sunday and I can confirm that you did indeed tell this Ravine Rookie that this area was closed!!!! <BR> <BR>We arrived in the ravine at about 1:50pm Yankee Time. After speaking to the USFS and the Ski Patrol about Avie danger in the ravine we heeded their valued advice and moved in to set up/gear up on the floor of the Ravine, just below the Chute. You may remember me as having a Canadian Flag attached to my ski pole on my back pack. As we geared up we witnessed a skier carelessly skiing towards the Lip, this could only be bad!!! I won't get into what happened after that, because you definitely put it best. Great work on your very descriptive report!!! <BR> <BR>Here's where I can add some insight... <BR>After the Tool triggered this massive slide, he them skied over to his gear and wouldn't you know it, his gear and his dog was right beside ours. I was fuming and was in know condition to have any words with him! BUT, I did get to hear his conversation with two other ravine skiers, and let me tell you, he "ain't so smart"!!!! <BR> <BR>Here are just a few quotes from his conversation: <BR>"Geez that really gets the blood pumpin'", "I bet I'm not the most popular person in the ravine right now!", "That wasn't so big", my personal favourite "Did you see them run like a bunch of little girls?" We had three girls in our crew and they gave him such an evil look, I'm amazed he didn't catch on fire instantly!!! Mark here's your proof, I've got 5 others who will confirm he said, "They told me not to ski there when I got here, but who would have known" Believe it or not he was even talking about doing another run in the same spot cause he din't want to end it on that note!!! So there it is!!! Sorry Mr. Tool, for spilling your beans,but ENQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW!!!! <BR> <BR>Hope this helps you look into the mind of a careless Ravine Rookie!!! Who, no matter how many trip to Tucks he has under his belt, will always be "Ravine Rookie Trash"!!! <BR>So, Mr. Anonymous, he did tell him sooo!!! <BR> <BR>All I know is that this is something that I will never forget, I can still close my eyes and replay the event, I'm just thankful, I'm not replaying a tragic event!!! We are all very fortunate that no-one was injured in Sunday's Avalanche. In my eyes the information provided to us by the USFS Snow Rangers and the Tuckerman Ravine V-O-L-U-N-T-E-E-R Ski Patrol (remember they are volunteering for all of us) is a very valuable part of our travels in the backcountry. Thanks a million. <BR> <BR>P.S. Avalanche is the same in French, so know worries, you got the word out!!! Great work!
 
I'm no lawyer, but I like to pretend to show that I understand stuff that I really have no clue... <BR> <BR>I think a significant problem in such a hypothetical case (had this guy actually killed someone with the avalanche) is that the risk of avalanche death is definitely inherent in Tuckerman's, especially on that day, since USFS had escalated the danger report. <BR> <BR>If I recall correctly, a significant issue in the Nathan Hale case was whether or not the man that was struck by him was participating in a sport where this was an inherent risk. This had to be settled, in addition to whether or not NH was acting negligently. <BR> <BR>The fact that you are even at the bottom of Tuckerman's is (IMHO) showing that you accept the risk of natural and man made avalanches and other dangers. It is not exactly the same as skiing down the front side of Vail. <BR> <BR>So some sort of homicide - definitely would be hard to stick. Civil cases, of course, are an entirely different manner in this litigous society.
 
Was the person in question on Volkl Snow Rangers with alpine bindings? If so I think I know who he was and he is a local with a very big ego.
 
Eric, <BR> <BR>Well there may be inherent risk at Tuckerman, but the fact remains, the guy knowingly skied a closed area, ignoring hazards - potentially jeopardizing both himself and others - made clear to him by both posted warnings and closings and verbal instruction. <BR> <BR>Any inherent and accepted risk does not included this disobedience. <BR> <BR>Had there been a victim - thank god there wasn't - the "perp" would be much more guilty than Nathan Hall. After all the potential fatal results of avalanches are far more obvious than those of skiing fast.
 
Hey, John ZE, Eric is right. <BR> <BR>The inherent and accepted risk DOES include other human beings who do stupid things, even disobeying posted warnings or closures. <BR> <BR>The law, the snow ranger, or the ski patrol, is not going to save your ass every time. You are on your own up there. It is not the government's job to make skiing Tucks "safe". It's your responsibility to be smart enough to keep your eyes open, and try not be in the fall line under a jerk like that (or blocks of ice that might fall at any moment without warning), and if you get killed, tough luck, game over. <BR> <BR>And guess what? The guy's not even going to go to jail. So get used to it. Don't play with fire if you don't want to get burned.
 
Ooooh, fire? I love to play with it! <BR> <BR>I'll take care of myself and my own burns. <BR> <BR>And I don't think the guy should go to jail. After all, I was only wondering about the hypothetical instance of someone being killed by a similar avalanche, and not Mr. Ain't So Smart himself. <BR> <BR>That being said, say some average joe driver runs a red light, and strikes a car legally driving through the intersection, killing the driver. Now we all know that driving is inherently risky and can result in death, especially because of idiot actions of another. If someone skis the Lip when it is closed - in other words, when the USFS, or whosever jurisdiction it is, forbids all form of traffic (hiking, skiing, ice climbing, etc.) over The Lip - and some innocent 3rd party were to be killed as the result, how would this be any different than joe driver who ran the red light? <BR> <BR>You are correct that it is every skier's personal responsibility to conscious of his or her own safety and of all the potential hazards. But in a civil society, one expects posted law, regulations, etc. to be obeyed. And furthermore Tuckerman, unlike King Ravine, Great Gulf, Gulf of Slides, etc., does have a ski patrol, and does close certain areas to traffic. <BR> <BR>But it is an interesting question, because Tuckerman is in this Purgatory of ski area and backcountry, where there is an accepted high level of risk and independence, and yet a ski patrol, trail names and posting of conditions, etc. Hopefully my hypothetical question will never become a real one. Though for comparison there is the ludicrous suit filed by the father of Cheryl Weingarten. IIRC it is described in "Not Without Peril."
 
Hey, here's a laugher: <BR> <BR>Turns out Mr. Ain't So Smart grew up around the corner from me. <BR> <BR>Apparently he had skied the left side of the bowl 4 times and figured since the snow there seemed fine, that it'd be ok over the Lip, too. <BR> <BR>Smiley, he thought your group thought the slide was funny. <BR> <BR>He really had (has) no clue...
 
Funny. Yeah right. S-t-r-a-n-g-e. Been the "butt of our jokes" for the past week among the "Ravine Regulars", from our local mountain.
 
THIS REALLY SOUNDED TO ME LIKE A CASE OF.....WHERE DANGER IS DANGER HIDES.I HAVE NEVER SKIED THE RAVINE---BUT HAVE OFTEN LOOKED ACROSS FROM WILDCAT AND MARVELED AT IT.THIS IS INCRED TERRAIN---AND I JUST THINK CAUTION ALWAYS NEEDS TO BE EXERCISED.AFTER ALL, THIS MT IS "NOT" PATS PEAK!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top