As Wash. state avalanche tragedy shows, you can't buy sound judgment
Craig Medred |
Feb 20, 2012
Girdwood skier Elyse Saugstad believes an ABS Avalanche Airbag Backpack saved her life in a deadly, weekend avalanche in the Cascade Mountains of Washington state, and it probably did. The emergency gear, which can be triggered to inflate a float around the head of someone caught in an avalanche, has a sterling reputation in Europe, where it was pioneered. Likely because of that float, Saugstad's head was above the avalanche rubble after the snow stopped moving, although nearly all of the rest of her was buried. She was dug out alive. Three others were not so lucky, but you have to wonder what killed them. "All the people in the party were properly equipped and experienced backcountry travelers," Saustad wrote on her blog in a "press statement for the media." This has been the narrative since the tragic accident Sunday near Stevens Pass, about 75 miles northeast of Seattle. "Well-equipped and familiar with the terrain, about a dozen expert skiers were making their way through a foot-and-a-half of fresh snow when an avalanche hit them in an out-of-bounds area near a popular Washington ski resort,'' reported the Minneapolis Star Tribune. "From what I’m told, they were all very knowledgeable, expert skiers," King County Sheriff’s Sgt. Katie Larson told the Yakima Herald. Why then are they dead? "That's the risk that we take," Joel Hammond, who was with the group, told KING 5 News. It is, sadly, that sort of thinking that finally drove Anchorage's Doug Fesler out of the avalanche-education business. Fesler founded the Alaska Avalanche School in 1976. It's still in business and remains an excellent place to learn about avalanches and how to avoid them. But Fesler is no longer teaching. Once a big believer in the power of education, he spent too many years digging the bodies of former students out of avalanches. He finally came to understand that the most important piece of avalanche "gear'' is the brain, and it's hard to train. Fesler, wife Jill Fredston and Bruce Temper of the Utah Avalanche Forecast Center eventually co-authored a paper titled "The Human Factor -- Lessons for Avalanche Education.'' In that paper, Fesler and his co-authors recognize that most deadly avalanches are triggered by people, as just happened in Washington. They go on to say: "Most accidents occur because the victims either underestimate the hazard or overestimate their ability to deal with it. Victims tend to make critical decisions based on human desires and assumptions rather than upon the integration of key pieces of physical data." All of which is a complicated way of saying people get so preoccupied with having fun that they stop thinking about how the snow-world in which they are playing could kill them. And now, three people -- expert skiers all -- are dead. The story only tangentially touches the 49th state because one of the people caught in the avalanche was an Alaskan. And yet the whole disaster could just as easily have happened here. There are slopes in the mountains all around Anchorage today with nasty layers of hard, wind-packed snow atop crumbling layers of old sugary snow, waiting for the right conditions or the unthinking person to trigger a slide. When Fesler started the local avalanche school back in the 1970s, the people who ventured into the backcountry worried about conditions like these a fair bit. Increasingly, there is a tendency to put the worries aside in favor of technology. The thought process goes like this: "I'm wearing an avalanche beacon. I've got on an ABS backpack. Me, why worry?'' Why worry? Because neither of those pieces of gear -- nor the old-fashioned shovel and probe that should be carried by everyone in avalanche country -- are the most important equipment. That’s the brain. It makes the decisions. The people who use it to determine conditions are just a little too dicey and retreat home, get to ski, snowboard or snowmachine another day. The Washington accident was horrible and tragic. Maybe if some Alaskans pay attention, lives can be saved. Both the ABS that saved Saugstad and the beacon are last-ditch survival tools. The key is to avoid having to use them. They often don't prevent tragedy. The beacons on the three dead skiers in Washington were used only to find their bodies. The paradox here is that too many "properly-equipped'' people die in avalanches while a whole bunch of those equipped with nothing but avalanche awareness go home to return another day. It's not about the equipment. Contact Craig Medred at craig(at)alaskadispatch.com.
by thulefoth | February 24, 2012 - 7:16pm
Snow, and beautiful wintry days, are an "attractive nuisance", like water, mountains, and all the clever ways we invent to Go Fast. There is no 'need' to go fast. But it's a kick in the pants, so people ski fast, downhill, just to have fun in the great outdoors, in the beautiful sunshine & mountain scenary, slidding downhill fast on skiis. Sonny Bono, Natasha Richardson, to mention a couple famous ones. On groomed slopes. In-bounds. Decades ago, it was considered great sport to get falling-down drunk after work on Friday night, and then drive your car home. The carnage was pretty spectacular. But hey - everybody was having fun ... and those who thought the risks were avoidable made their excuses and went home. There is a noticeable element of 'fashion', running through our selection of risk-taking venues. Different ways & contexts for sticking yer neck out fer fun & grins, come & go on the fashion-charts. And it's true what those who chose these recreational risks say; that you still have a prostate gland, or breasts, ya know, so don't go getting all cocky there.
by AKPM | February 22, 2012 - 9:01pm
Craig needs to shut up on this subject, he clearly has no idea what he is talking about. He clearly doesn't understand that this particular avalanche was in a place that hadn't seen an avalanche of that size for hundreds of years. Playing in the mountains means minimizing objective risks, and from I have read and heard from those involved in this tragedy the group minimized objective risk. But that risk remained, and when you play with fire you get burned once in a while. An avalanche sweeping people out of old growth forest rarely happens. Basically what Craig is saying would be like blaming victims of an earthquake in Anchorage for living here. Its that random, in this case at least. I'm so glad Elsye survived, and so saddened by the loss of three great skiers.
by nixin | February 23, 2012 - 12:15am
Obviously you are a runt. No skills. Poseur. Talk to me when you get to be 20.
by De | February 22, 2012 - 3:40pm
Maybe everyone missed the part where Saugstead is a extreme skiing champion? From the comments its obvious that lots of people ride backcountry but they must be the ones who ride low angle slopes. Lots of people have ample snow safety education and still die in avys cause they enjoy a challenge and want to get away from all the gapers. So they seek out more difficult terrain, which is of course more prone to avys. This doesn't mean they relied on their gear too much but more that they knew what the risks were and took them anyways because that is their lifestyle. People on these comments need to think that other people have different priorities in life, and if you can't appreciate that then shame on you. Go ride tincan with 50 other people and leave the big lines to us
by Matthew Carberry | February 22, 2012 - 11:25am
Mindset, mindset, mindset. I suggest reading Lawrence Gonzales' "Deep Survival" for a look at what happens in the mind as multiple, seemingly small, conscious decisions occur that, looked at from an external holistic perspective, can be seen to lead a competent, smart person into situations with a decreased risk of avoidance or even survival. Other good books on not letting knowledge and conscious confidence override the perhaps more perceptive and holistic "gut" when it comes to small signs of danger (of all kinds) are Mike Bane's "Trail Safe" and Gavin De Becker's "Gift of Fear".
by whatha | February 22, 2012 - 2:53pm
Thanks for the references!
by Skeptic | February 22, 2012 - 9:49am
Seems to me that a lot of back-country skiers take their attitude towards risk and death from the mountain climbing community. I don't see any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, to suggest that the average BC skier skiing sketchy terrain is unworried or un-careful of avalanche dangers. Rather they are just less risk adverse than Medred would like them to be. I just don't see the need to second guess the judgement and intelligence of 3 dead persons.
by MissMuffet | February 22, 2012 - 9:27am
Nice job on the pretentious snow blowers that think there is no pile too big and then whine about just not enough gear to overcome raw nature.
by AkRiffRaff2 | February 21, 2012 - 8:31pm
Wow, didn't take long for CM to draw conclusions. If we all listened to the likes of DF we'd never go BC skiing. Get educated and do the best you can...that is all.
by whatha | February 22, 2012 - 11:50am
If you had ever taken one of Dougs classes, you'd have a different opinion. Same if you knew his background.
by whatha | February 21, 2012 - 12:32pm
Technology is great, but.... Too many people rely on it heavily, whether they realize it or not. One place you see this is in the boating world. I wonder how many people could actually plot a course on a chart? How many could function if they lost power? A chart? Compass? 'Take a shot'? Listen? I spend a lot of time hiking, x-country skiing, biking and carry a Spot. It is great for checking in periodically (if conditions are right), but it is no substitute for common sense. Letting someone know where we are and when we'll return - I don't go out alone. Paying attention to conditions and our limitations. Self preservation. Can I say Self Preservation again? It is too bad that Doug Fessler has gotten out of the business. I received training with him at work years ago and it was the best training I've had in anything. His hands on and common sense approach was exactly what people need. Learning how to read and understand conditions keeps you from getting into trouble. Once more? Self preservation.....
by akcrosby | February 21, 2012 - 12:01pm
The article and opinions of the writer are right on. I have travel the back country for 60 plus years in Colorado, Utah and Alaska without any misshapes, because I used my brain, fears and training to stay out of trouble. You can travel into remote areas and not get hurt if you understand the conditions and your abilities. In my mind so called "experts" seem to always push their capabilities and get hurt. All of the modern equipment is nice, but a functioning brain in your head is always a winner. This paragraph is so true, "The paradox here is that too many "properly-equipped'' people die in avalanches while a whole bunch of those equipped with nothing but avalanche awareness go home to return another day. It's not about the equipment". They use their head's to stay alive and have fun the next time-out. By the way numbers are always used to justify the means and end.
by akiceman | February 21, 2012 - 11:29am
Medred writes: "When Fesler started the local avalanche school back in the 1970s, the people who ventured into the backcountry worried about conditions like these a fair bit. Increasingly, there is a tendency to put the worries aside in favor of technology."
by craigmedred | February 21, 2012 - 2:46pm
And you believe that claim of a tenfold increase in use because...? Aside from concentrations of people in a few popular areas, such as Turnagain Pass, I see fewer people than ever in the backcountry. Well, except maybe for snowmachiners. There's more of them, which might have something to do with why snowmachine avalanche deaths have gone up. The increase in muscle-powered activity to which you refer might be labeled "backcountry" by the marketing gurus at gear companies, but it's really more frontcountry. Or "lift-served backcountry" as they call it Outside. Or "road-served backcountry'' as you might call it here in Alaska, which is probably not a bad thing. There are enough people in the "backcountry" at Turnagain now, for instance, that if you're behaving rashly someone might actually talk to you about avalanche safety. I know I've queried a few people in the Chugach as of late as to whether they have any knowledge of the make up of the snowpack around Anchorage. There is, in places, a crust hard to break with a shovel, but if you bust through it, you'll find inches to feet down a couple layers of nothing. I don't know about you, but even if I'm wearing a beacon, I don't want car-size blocks coming down on me.
by akiceman | February 21, 2012 - 7:16pm
Arguing semantics to make your point is moot. The fact is there are more people skiing and recreating then ever before yet accident rates have only slightly increased. Driving through Turnagain on a sunny winter weekend confirms this. As for the front range... wind slab on top of sugar is what we have every year until late March. That's why the hoards don't ski Peak 3 until early April.
by craigmedred | February 21, 2012 - 11:36pm
I agree. So let's talk statistics. There really aren't any worth beans for backcountry, but there are for ski resorts. Because there is real money involved, resorts count every customer, including those who only use the lifts -- as in the case of Washington state -- to access the "backcountry." If you look at those numbers, they indicate skiing has basically flatlined for a decade: http://www.statista.com/statistics/206544/estimated-number-of-skier-visits-in-the-us-since-2000/ There is no evidence of more people skiing and recreating than ever before. The numbers go up and down ever so slightly, appearing to reflect mainly snow conditions in the Lower 48. Yeah, yeah, I know: Backcountry, backcountry, backcountry. But every backcountry skier honed his or her skills by skiing at a resort first. You improve with practice, practice, practice. And that's simply easier at lift-served areas. So if backcountry has grown so much, why is there no sign of the necessary cohort in the resort numbers to fuel recruitment? I agree with you that driving through Turnagain Pass on a sunny winter weekend would certainly confirm there are now significant number of skiers at Turnagain Pass on a sunny winter weekend. It reveals nothing more than that. For all anyone knows, there used to be lot more skiers on crappy weekends, making for average winter use that is much the same. Now, as for wind slab on sugar in the Chugach, yes, we've had it before. Sometimes it's gone by late March; sometimes not. This winter? This winter seems a little unusual. But maybe you remember others with winds of hurricane force, followed by hurricane, snow, hurricane, hurricane, rain, snow, cold snap, thaw, snow, full gale, snow, and warming. I don't, though I do remember the heavy snow winters of '94-'95 and 2003-2004. There was lots of snow those years, but not nearly the wind, and the layering just wasn't the same. I kicked off some nice slides in '03-'04, but they were pretty tame, pretty predictable slides of soft snow. Now, in some of the places where those went down, there's so much windblown snow you can't even tell by looking at the terrain that there are terrain features underneath prone to avalanche. Not to mention that already this winter I've seen two avalanches come down in places near my home that have never once avalanched in 25 previous winters. I will grant you this, though, the "what we have every year" thinking is a wonderful illustration of what gets people killed. The reality is that no two winters are ever the same, and if you start thinking that they are you become a statistic waiting to happen. Now, be safe out there.
by akiceman | February 22, 2012 - 12:27pm
Your friend Lou can provide you with statistics regarding backcountry users. Here are a couple links for you: I know you'll write the numbers off as marketing - but if you do then it shows you don't get out much anymore. The difference you see in number in Turnagain from 1990-2010 is quite obvious. There will be 50 people on Tincan alone on a sunny day whereas in 1990 a good day saw 50 skiers tops in the pass. And many of those skiers (myself included) learned how to ski just fine in the backcounty.
by nixin | February 21, 2012 - 11:07pm
Hey akiceman, seems you are pretty self-informed on this topic and strongly opinionated. You must have outraced many avalanches! Maybe you could write columns we would all like to read too. Where is your website? I tried i-am-a-cheesedog.com but didn't see your articles there?
by nixin | February 21, 2012 - 11:14pm
CM, thanks for the article. Hope more heed the warnings.
by Ridgerunner | February 21, 2012 - 9:19am
This article is spot on. Education can only go so far in getting folks to exercise sound judgement.
by jimbehlke | February 21, 2012 - 8:52pm
Also, Stevens Pass, the area where this accident occurred, is a tough, adverse place-- site of the worst avalanche/ railroad disaster in U.S. history, 96 people killed, some not recovered for months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellington,_Washington_avalanche |













Comments