Forum Index > Trail Talk > lessons learned about avalanches
 This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
FUN CH
Member
Member


Joined: 25 Feb 2013
Posts: 334 | TRs | Pics
FUN CH
Member
PostThu Oct 30, 2014 3:02 pm 
I tried to post this article over at TAY but don't seem to be able to get it in the format. I obtained permission from the author to post it on my local on line forum for discussion. The article appeared in "The Avalanche Review" print version but did not make it to the on line version of this publication. Lessons Learned GNFAC Professional Development Workshop On March 6, 2013, members of the southwest Montana snow and avalanche community assembled in Bozeman to participate in the fourth annual Professional Development Workshop hosted by the Gallatin National Forest Avalanche Center. The day-long workshop featured a medley of presenters with broad expertise in snow and avalanche research, avalanche forecasting, ski patrolling, ski guiding, avalanche education, mountain search and rescue operations, and institutional risk management within the scope of outdoor education and recreation. Titled “Lessons Learned," the workshop was essentially a compilation of personal incident accounts in which significant injury or loss due to avalanche hazard occurred or was narrowly avoided. Throughout the day, many themes emerged, the most consistent of which was the simple truth that, regardless of years of experience, even the most renowned and experienced practitioners in the field of snow and avalanches are not immune to making mistakes. Efforts are made to maintain the highest standard of safety possible, and our professional community has made great strides in understanding the dynamic behaviors of snow and avalanches. Nevertheless, we continue to chart unknown territory, and the eerie reality of trial and error remains. By shining a spotlight on errors and miscalculations, and by being accountable for analyzing our mistakes, great contributions are made to this field. The workshop began with Drew Leemon’s presentation entitled Risk Management: The NOLS Perspective. By sharing the ins and outs of the NOLS risk management system, long-time risk management director Leemon established a foundational framework for the workshop. With 28 years of incident data that documents remote rescues, medical emergencies, evacuations, and “near misses," NOLS analyzes risk and safety practices constantly and has established risk management as a core component of its institutional culture. With such an extensive incident database, NOLS has established a systematic incident review process. Through documenting, categorizing, and analyzing incidents, NOLS can learn from experience, strive for self-improvement, and continuously revise institutional program standards when necessary. Leemon broke the ice and set a standard of transparency and critical self-analysis for the rest of the workshop speakers. As Randy Elliot put it so bluntly, “If you can’t be good, be lucky." Listening to renowned avalanche practitioners recount heart-pounding stories of narrowly avoiding getting caught in avalanches is unnerving. But, in recognizing how dynamic and complex the winter backcountry environment is, sometimes lessons are just learned the hard way and, as Karl Birkeland said, “as professionals, we need to recognize when we have close calls and change our behavior.” Workshop speakers, fortunately for all in attendance, walked away from their near-miss incidents informed, grateful, and better prepared for the future. A recurring theme of the workshop was the importance of terrain selection. As Doug Chabot and Eric Knoff learned on several occasions, appropriate terrain selection is crucial when digging snowpits. Speaking about a slope outside of Cooke City, MT that he and his partner named “Almost Died," Chabot pointed out that it is never worth risking your life or your partners' lives (much less both at the same time) in order to collect data. In support of Chabot's views, Karl Birkeland stressed the significance of route selection and stressed the importance of ascending slopes by the safest up-track possible. Long-time Big Sky snow safety director Jon Ueland underscored the importance of always choosing islands of safety that will offer real protection. “You only know you are in a safe zone if all the snow around you disappears and you are still standing,” he said. Professionalism and the importance of communication came up time and again throughout the workshop. Decisions made and opinions expressed by professionals carry great significance and can and should have a disproportionate influence on the safety and well being of others. As Nick Meyers, Mike Buotte, and Lynne Wolfe all noted, good communication skills are essential for avalanche control work, when discussing and analyzing the stability of the snowpack, or when simply working with a partner or team in an intense situation. The familiarity professionals develop with a season’s snowpack or specific terrain can often pose a dangerous sense of overconfidence. As Karl Birkeland attested, it is so important to be thinking about the worst-case scenario and to be intentional with whom you travel in avalanche terrain. "Ski with a partner who will be thinking about avalanches and skiing appropriately,” he advised. And, as Nick Meyers suggested, “Ask yourself: are my thoughts, words, actions an asset or liability to the situation?” An additional theme that surfaced was the fundamental importance of recognizing and assessing the type of avalanche problem you are dealing with. According to Rod Newcomb, professionals need to be aware that they often analyze the snowpack only from their scope of experience. Instead, he urged professionals to have heightened awareness of obscure and unfamiliar conditions, and to recognize that even the most experienced avalanche practitioners may still be novices to what can happen. Obscure and unexpected conditions are often responsible for close calls and fatalities involving professionals. However, depth hoar, he asserted, is the primary avalanche problem associated with patroller fatalities. According to Newcomb, a reliable rule of thumb with regard to depth hoar and depth hoar-like snowpacks is always "to expect the crown and the slide to exceed your expectation of how far it will propagate, and how large the slide will be.” Experience with obscure stability conditions offered other workshop lessons. Doug Chabot recounted a near miss during which he learned that even low density, powder snow can act as a slab and produce avalanches. In reflecting on the 1996-97 winter avalanche that demolished the Shedhorn Lift at Big Sky, Scott Savage learned never to trust a rapid load on ice, a crust, or a hard surface, regardless of whether or not facets exist at the slab-weak layer interface. And, regardless of what kind of avalanche problem is believed to be present, Lynne Wolfe urged professionals to ask: “How detectable is the problem?” and “How manageable is the problem?” with the intention of forming an honest, specific, and unbiased opinion of current snowpack stability. Professionals often tend to overestimate manageability; even a small avalanche can pack quite a punch. As risk management practices develop and become ever more ingrained in the work of outdoor professionals, “near miss” or close call incidents (in which significant injury or loss is narrowly avoided) have become focused opportunities for learning. However, the negative repercussions for outdoor professionals of such incidents -- which range from embarrassment to the loss of a job -- are not pleasant to contemplate. Putting egos aside, the workshop speakers recognized the obvious truth that if you end up spending years in avalanche terrain, accidents will occur, and sooner or later you are bound to make a mistake. For more information, visit the GNFAC video archive on YouTube at www.youtube.com/user/AvalancheGuys where all the workshop presentations may be seen. Bio: Andrew Kiefer graduated from Prescott College this past spring and attended the professional development workshop during his internship with the GNFAC.

'' what did you dream, it's alright we told we told you what to dream....so welcome to the machine'' David Gilmor (pink floyd)
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 6303 | TRs | Pics
gb
Member
PostThu Oct 30, 2014 3:08 pm 
You should change the name of the thread to have the word avalanches or about…to get the right viewing audience.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
I'm Pysht
Member
Member


Joined: 11 Jul 2007
Posts: 517 | TRs | Pics
Location: Pacific NW
I'm Pysht
Member
PostThu Oct 30, 2014 4:39 pm 
Thanks, and thanks to Mr. Keifer. I've always found it fascinating how the dramatic beauty and exhilaration of snow country activities can draw folks in like the Sirens, though usually and thankfully with much better outcomes.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Chico
Member
Member


Joined: 30 Nov 2012
Posts: 2500 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lacey
Chico
Member
PostThu Oct 30, 2014 5:52 pm 
George Johnson wrote:
dramatic beauty and exhilaration of snow country activities can draw folks in like the Sirens
I like that analogy!

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
FUN CH
Member
Member


Joined: 25 Feb 2013
Posts: 334 | TRs | Pics
FUN CH
Member
PostFri Oct 31, 2014 2:45 pm 
Thanks gb, took your advise and changed the heading. As you may know, I have been working towards a requirement for all outfitters/guides operating on public land to report all near miss avalanche incidents involving clients and guides. The working theory is that being held accoutable for these types of incidents will lead to better discion making and hopefully less of these types of accident incidents. This theory is backed by research. I can't understand stand why I have been getting extreme pushback on this issue from the commercial guides, but this brilliant article by Mr. Keifer sheds some insight into this.

'' what did you dream, it's alright we told we told you what to dream....so welcome to the machine'' David Gilmor (pink floyd)
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 6303 | TRs | Pics
gb
Member
PostFri Oct 31, 2014 4:00 pm 
This is the same issue Frank Baumann (AVABLANCHE) worked on tirelessly in BC for many years. Although things have gotten better there, his work was still unfinished at the time of his death.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
joker
seeker



Joined: 12 Aug 2006
Posts: 7953 | TRs | Pics
Location: state of confusion
joker
seeker
PostSat Nov 01, 2014 1:06 pm 
Thanks for sharing the article, freeski.
Freeski wrote:
I can't understand stand why I have been getting extreme pushback on this issue from the commercial guides, but this brilliant article by Mr. Keifer sheds some insight into this.
Just a thought: perhaps try avoiding direct critiques of particular guiding operations, and coming across as sharply critiquing the whole notion of "commercial guiding" in avalanche terrain (whether intended or not, several of your TAY posts have come across to me in much this way, which would surely get my back up if I were a ski guide whose outfit you were calling out; even many clients of guiding operations seem to get distracted from your actual policy proposal by such critiques). Instead focus on sharing what the data shows (the research you refer to) and the proposed policy you'd like to see instituted. As you've done here in this post. That would be my approach if I were trying to gain wider support for such a policy.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
joker
seeker



Joined: 12 Aug 2006
Posts: 7953 | TRs | Pics
Location: state of confusion
joker
seeker
PostSat Nov 01, 2014 1:09 pm 
Freeski wrote:
The working theory is that being held accoutable for these types of incidents will lead to better discion making and hopefully less of these types of accident incidents.
I think this would also get yet more useful incident analysis out to the rest of the community, which would be another beneficial result. I've almost always found reading incident and accident reports to be enlightening.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
nordique
Member
Member


Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 1086 | TRs | Pics
nordique
Member
PostSun Nov 02, 2014 4:50 pm 
For more about avalanche avoidance, see this piece (which I also tried, unsuccessfully, to post on TAY):

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Bernardo
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 2174 | TRs | Pics
Location: out and about in the world
Bernardo
Member
PostSun Nov 02, 2014 7:52 pm 
Nordique, Laudable goal, but seems like wishful thinking without more actionable items.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
spamfoote
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Oct 2014
Posts: 860 | TRs | Pics
spamfoote
Member
PostSun Nov 02, 2014 8:15 pm 
This is an awesome reminder to all of us going out this winter. Especially to those who rarely venture out in winter. I still remember when I spent nearly an entire winter in the mountains. I was VERY aware of conditions, loadings, etc, and did not come even close to being in an avalanche even though I was in Very dangerous country. But the next year I spent Very little time and correspondingly was not as keenly aware of the loadings from previous storms, layers etc. Naturally, my lack of awareness of loadings from previous storms nearly cost me my life even when I was on far more moderate terrain with a "current" avalanche forecast. It is NOT enough to just read the current avalanche report when going snowshoeing/skiing in the winter. Be ultra cautious as you are not as aware of local loading directions. Especially from the wind. A S/SW wind loading info on the avalanche forecast does not always correspond to loadings from this wind direction. Comes with experience to read the features and how the stated wind loading from the S/SW stated in the forecast translates to the local terrain. It is the MICRO terrain you need worry yourself about causing the avalanches. A mere change in angle on a short 3meter slope is all that is needed for the avalanche to start. Please, everyone, when rarely venturing out in winter, be ultra cautious. This is not summer. This is not spring. Winter is a wonderful time. There is nothing as beautiful as the mountains in winter. Enjoy.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Chico
Member
Member


Joined: 30 Nov 2012
Posts: 2500 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lacey
Chico
Member
PostSun Nov 02, 2014 9:01 pm 
nordique wrote:
For more about avalanche avoidance, see this piece (which I also tried, unsuccessfully, to post on TAY):
Here in Washington we call the road death project "Target Zero" and it too is working. It consists of the four E's. Education, Enforcement, Engineering and Emergency Medical Response. The Washington Traffic Safety Commission provides the education, WSP does the enforcement and WSDOT does the engineering. Local emergency responders do the medical response of course. It works so well it's a model for other states.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Chico
Member
Member


Joined: 30 Nov 2012
Posts: 2500 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lacey
Chico
Member
PostSun Nov 02, 2014 9:04 pm 
Freeski wrote:
I can't understand stand why I have been getting extreme pushback on this issue from the commercial guides
Why? If I was a guide and there was an avalanche in the area I was in (and could thus be blamed for causing it) I wouldn't want to report it for fear of being blamed for causing it and not knowing what I was doing and so on and so forth. Sometimes it's best to keep your mouth shut. My opinion only.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
spamfoote
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Oct 2014
Posts: 860 | TRs | Pics
spamfoote
Member
PostSun Nov 02, 2014 10:14 pm 
Chico wrote:
Freeski wrote:
I can't understand stand why I have been getting extreme pushback on this issue from the commercial guides
Why? If I was a guide and there was an avalanche in the area I was in (and could thus be blamed for causing it) I wouldn't want to report it for fear of being blamed for causing it and not knowing what I was doing and so on and so forth. Sometimes it's best to keep your mouth shut. My opinion only.
The reason has nothing to do with what you state. Guides don't because they rightly view it as a waste of time unless one is going to dedicate their life to the study of avalanches. Guides have to keep their clients safe, not go haring off diagnosing avalanches. When going in the winter, you see avalanches all the time. Old debris, just happened, and first witness events. Diagnosing the cause, is time consuming and can be dangerous. Without knowing the cause it is frankly useless information.(You can get the same information by observing the avalanche paths through the trees...) That is why the guides push back. Stating an avalanche happened is a big ol' yawner. It is next to useless information. One must travel to the trigger point and diagnose the cause which entails documenting the layers, angle, orientation, etc. NO one is going to say to their client, "Excuse me, I have to go a half mile over there, several hundred feet up, pull out my shovel and snow saw, dig a pit to test for the cause of the avalanche." Or at the site where one triggers an avalanche, one is going to stop, dig a pit and figure out the layers, orientation, and trigger force required? NO! You are gonna say, D#$*$)*)(@)#)(R GET THE BLEEP OUTTA HERE! All the while hoping you can get out of the danger zone and somewhere safe. Once safe, you are now going to stop and go back?!? eek.gif eek.gif eek.gif Meanwhile, your clients are spooked, scared and getting cold by the way, and go back? The guide would have to be insane to do that! Only someone sitting in a nice fat warm room with no wind or precipitation would propose such an insane guide procedure. I am all for the study of avalanches etc, but use some common sense. If you really want to study avalanches go to Switzerland some institute or other written in German I can't pronounce. Do a google search. It will be up on top. They have been documenting, yes, STUDYING, avalanches for hundreds of years. Or Rogers Pass in BC where all slides are documented. At least I still believe they are by the British Columbia University along with the Mounted Royal Police(road conditions). Maybe I am mis-remembering. Snow is an amazingly complex structure. Local conditions will always be: Local. Snow avalanche safety changes hourly. Even with, hot off the presses, avalanche, snowpack information from several hours previously, would not necessarily correlate to the conditions several hours later. Conditions change quickly. It would help, but honestly unless there is an immense increase in the numbers of people being guided, or touring in winter, this is a dead issue. The number of people being guided in winter is absurdly small. Would also require a standardized snow pit evaluation taught to all guides(there is none that I know of other than first hand observation for shear strength etc). This would require more tools to measure grainsize etc = weight. Good Luck on that one. It is well intentioned, but forgets the KISS principle.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
trestle
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 2093 | TRs | Pics
Location: the Oly Pen
trestle
Member
PostMon Nov 03, 2014 4:53 am 
Freeski wrote:
The working theory is that being held accoutable for these types of incidents will lead to better discion making and hopefully less of these types of accident incidents. This theory is backed by research.
I would like to know more about this research, specifically if it's been published. The database being proposed makes sense within a ski area or regularly controlled area but has less significance in a purely backcountry setting due to widely varied local conditions (as noted by others).

"Life favors the prepared." - Edna Mode
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Forum Index > Trail Talk > lessons learned about avalanches
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum