View Single Post
  #3  
Old February 24th 04, 06:09 PM
Me
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Near fatal ski incident

Comments below.

Kim

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 12:09:24 -0800, Chris Cline wrote:

--0-1714733143-1077561139=:60387
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi Kim-
I read thru your post with interest because I recently got myself into a
similar "crossing the line but not realizing it" situation. Like you, I
got out OK, but spent a considerable amount of time afterwards trying to
identify the points where errors in our party's judgement had "created"
the incident.


Just like I did...


I also understand that the first little bit after the
incident, you're freaked, and maybe even in a little bit of mild
post-traumatic shock as you piece it all together and make sense of it.


I actually wasn't that freaked. I replayed the incident, yes, but I
almost felt guilty as if I wasn't giving it enough seriousness. Even now,
it is a few days later and I've mostly forgotten it. Am I giving it the
attention it deserves ? It is weird...


I think that the biggest error in judgement that I can see in your story
is not having the proper equipment.


Agreed. And yet except for the last section I skied without problems. I
had "submerging sessions", but other than that I was well within my
limits. I guess you can't go by "being mostly OK", you have to have
equipment for being OK even in the extreme conditions.


As I read thru it, I was expecting to
hear something along the lines of hitting trees, being delayed to the
point that lack of food and adequate clothing created a situation with
hypothermia, etc.


That is the point: any of those things COULD happen on a typical ski day.
We don't carry enough gear to stay out overnight. We don't wear helmets.
We do ski on tight trails in the trees.

A good rule of thumb is that if you're wearing track
gear, at least 80% of your route should be on groomed, set tracks (spring
crust skiing notwithstanding).


That is probably a good rule of thumb.

While I totally understand the urge to
keep on keeping on on a glorious day, having difficulties with your gear
on the way up should translate into a decision at some point that you
simply don't have the right tools for the job and should turn around. It
does sound like you kept that in mind, as at least you didn't press on to
the lake and points further out, and create a situation where you had to
ski out in difficult terrain in the dark.


Agreed.


As far as maps, compasses, etc. I'm not sure that carrying (or using
these more) would have helped you as much as being totally, continually
aware of your surroundings. A map can tell you there's a creek if it
occurs to you to look for it; otherwise you're as likely to miss it on the
map as anywhere else.


Had we a *detailed* map, we could have checked the route at the last
bridge. I don't know if seeing a creek on the map would have meant much.
I guess the thing to watch is that if you see a creek on the map and you
can't physically see the creek, you are probably skiing ON IT !

It sounds like you had a high level of awareness
regarding avalanches; I'd suggest that you extend that to everything else
about your surroundings. If you cross a bridge, that obviously means
there's water around somewhere- where's the creek.


Yeah.

Just keep observing
and keeping an inventory of these things. Another example of reading
terrain to stay out of trouble: Are the slopes above you made of smooth
rock layers? Afternoon glide avalanches off these rocks (which can occur
during very "low" avalanche danger relative to normal avalanche triggers)
have killed several people in Utah.


They've done that here too: a slide about 15 years ago happened really
early in the season. All the snow slid right off a layer of lush grass.
The snow didn't slide on the snow, it slid on the grass.

"Terrain traps" are also something to
avoid like the plague-- I normally think of them!
in terms
of getting caught in avalanche runout or debris in one, but after your
post, I will think of things like water and falling in holes.


Good. I'm glad this helped someone.


By the
way, if you're up above timberline in a talus area, a big hole between
boulders will mess you up just as much as a hole in a creek-- I have the
scar on my shin to prove it.


We get "tree wells" here. The snow will swirl around a short tree and not
really fill in properly. Over winter the snow covers it, but as soon as
you ski over that tree, you'll sink like a stone.

As far as "was this all this serious? am I over reacting?" Hell, yeah.
and Hell, no. a meter of rushing water going under ice is serious
business. If you never saw your ski again, where do you think you would
go?


My thoughts exactly. If I had gotten under the ice, I wouldn't be here
today.

You were very lucky, not least because you were lucky enough to
inadvertently increase your group size to be appropriate for your ski
trip.


The group size was a bonus, but I'm pretty sure that we wouldn't have
taken that trail if it was just the two of us. Yes, it was great having
Dale there !

Should you and your wife ski alone? It depends. On that trail, with that
equipment, and in those conditions, and with that particular route choice,
I'd say that "no" is a pretty obvious answer.


Hind sight is 20/20... how do we make that decision in the future ?


But you could ski alone if
you made the mental decision to exercise the "bail" option at a more
conservative decision-making point.


Agreed, *IF* one is seeing and accurately accessing the risk. How often
are we missing the risk factors ?

It sounds like you basically
blundered into a bad situation because you thought you were taking
everything into account and then found out that you weren't. I know this
because I'm relatively fresh from my own experience with this process.


Yep.

My guarantee: your freak-out level will decrease, and your level of
awareness will increase, and you will become a safer skiier.


Agreed.

And you will
still love the mountains, trees, sky, snow, etc.


Doubly agreed.

But you'll probably
either restrict your skiing to more "conservative" terrain (fixed tracks
and established trails),


probably not.

or get better skis and more experience in that
terrain.


I'll use different equipment AND implement some of the things I spoke of
in the article.

by the way-- I strongly suggest (if you're going to go with option B,
above), that you take an avalanche class because a) conditions change, and
b) visitor center-bound rangers may or may not be good sources of
information about avalanches.


I'm fully avalanche trained.

Also, another error I saw is that for the
area and terrain you were in, a shovel, avalanche beacon, and knowledge of
how to use the latter would have been a good thing. I've bailed on tours
just because I forgot my beacon.


I gave the beacon some thought, but about the only place we had the
potential to get caught was in a BIG runout. Under such conditions, I
doubt a beacon would have helped - you'd be dead.

A shovel on the other hand might be wise for reasons other than
avalanches.

Ads