OK. i was gonna wait awhile to comment, but i can't hold out anymore. here we go:
Risk-assessment is something that Americans seem to be pretty weak on.......
great point, and this is one point that lots of bc users see the need for
more of it being involved in "basic" avi courses.
decision making
:!: something we all seem to have a problem with when we see a
fresh powder field or a sweet line from a chair.......and especially if it
takes minimal effort to access. i remember seeing some sweet lines at
JH, but i knew there wasn't enough coverage and didn't know the terrain
all that well, so i opted to skip it. i knew my limits that day and saw that i
could easily get in over my head at JH, but didn't have even a basic
knowledge about the terrain i was googling at. knowing your limits is
important. good thing i wasn't riding with any females, cause the
probability of males taking risks around females is even higher. (sorry, no
numbers to back that up right now) i don't know to much about that face
at Telluride either, but if it's easy to access and people die there all the
time, then you've just proven the point. we, as adrenaline junkies/powder
hounds/extremist's/idiots make some poor decisions to get our fix. some
people don't know thier own ability and try to test thier waters in places
WAY over thier heads sometimes. i agree with pushing the limits. how
else will we improve our skiing/riding ability?
there are steps that will
get you there, not just going out and doing it. just cause you can hit a
big jump in the terrain park doesn't mean that you can now go throw a
corked 5 over it. this is what the "SMART STYLE" is all about in the
terrain parks. still, some just don't know thier limits and the potential for
the consequences of our actions...and those are the ones we hear about
as sad statistics. same goes for all other types of terrain(extreme, big
mtn. bc, whatever you want to call it). know your limits.
the whole "skull and crossbones" sign might not be the best way to get
the message across. a short little explanation about what you are getting
yourself into when you cross the boundary might have a little more effect
on the situation and decision we might choose to make. although, there
is always the "human factor".
They suggested that the chairlift end several hundred feet earlier to help discourage people from going out. Went on deaf ears. This not to say that ease of backcountry access will get people to use it.
if there's a gate to enter into the backcountry through (easily accessed or
not) then i believe that the ski area has the responsibility of informing
folks the danger that they are about to put themselves into. especially at
very popular resorts that attract many 'vacationers' who expect to ski
powder.....as advertised. a short description about the terrain and how it
is unpredictable and an avalanche rating for the day (low, moderate,
considerable, high, extreme) might be a couple suggestions. the sign
might also suggest that if you don't know what these ratings mean than to
please
stay in the boundaries. (
http://www.avalanche.org/usdanger.htm )
some people need to be told, and
shown thier own common sense sometimes.......especially when you can
see a fresh bowl from the lift. 2' of new snow doesn't say a whole lot
except for........sweet turns.......to most people. a few other things that
might be overlooked include, but is not limited to: recent stress on
snowpack, what kind of surface is the snow lying on, what have the
winds been like before/during/after the dump and in what direction, is it
an exposed slope, slope exposure, etc, etc. these thoughts do not go
through most peoples minds when they see a fresh bowl from a chairlift
just outside the boundary. things more like: this is our last day, we're
all "expert" riders, i've done some bc/ob skiing before, it's just outside
the ski area , and my favorite......there's already tracks on it might be
going through most peoples minds.
it's all a blurr after the decision has been made, whether a good one or a
bad one. we all hope they are good ones!
Too bad beacons are not more affordable to the males 20-35 who typically killl themselves in avalanches.
i know it. i wish all my friends could afford one, and thier sisters, and
her friends, and my cousin, and eveyone else who could ski. then we can
all have freshly tracked up snow all winter long....and hike for it.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
THERE ARE TO MANY FOLKS IN THE BC WHO ARE SIMPLY UNAWARE TO
BEGIN WITH. THAT'S ALL WE NEED...... TO MANY FOLKS PUT TO MUCH
EMPHASIS ON THE IMPORTANCE OF THIER EQUIPEMENT AND "SAFETY"
GEAR. THE BEACON IS A VERY CHEAP INSURANCE POLICY.......ALONG
WITH THE KNOWLEDGE OF YOUR PARTNERS YOU CHOOSE TO GO OUT
WITH. IT IS AN INSURANCE THAT DOESN'T GUARANTEE ANYTHING
THOUGH. YOU CAN STILL DIE. YES, EVEN
YOU!
NEXT TIME YOU'RE AT THE TOP OF A RUN IN THE
BACKCOUNTRY, ASK YOURSELF IF YOU WOULD STILL TAKE THAT RUN IF
YOU WERE TO HAND OVER YOUR BEACON TO YOUR BUDDY. AND ASK
YOUR BUDDY TO TURN HIS BEACON OFF TOO. SEE HOW HE/SHE
RESPONDS. NOW, what does my signature say?
i'll add this to it as well. don't put yourself in the situation to begin with.
pick your days, pick your lines, and pick your partners.
Resorts with some really good policies: Sunshine, Alberta and Bridger Bowl, Montana -- the backcountry gates do not open unless you have an avalanche beacon.
everything at Bridger is in bounds. there is no backcountry, nor is there
backcountry gates. it is all controlled area, although they do require a
beacon, shovel, and partner to hike the Ridge........IN BOUNDS terrain
inwhich you paid for. i hike for free thank you very much!
