Objective / Subjective Danger in Tree Skiing

Just heard that a friend of a friend was killed in Wyoming from a
collision with a tree. When something like that happens in climbing,
I always found it helpful to look at the accident report (a la
"Accidents in North American Mountaineering") to put the situation in
perspective and learn whatever there might be to learn from the
tragedy.

I'm wondering if such accident reports exists in the ski world? Each
year, there are a number of publicized deaths from tree
collisions--while each one is tragic, from a learning perspective, it
would be helpful to know, for example, are there typical conditions
when these happen (e.g., icy, poor cover), are victims usually skiing
at normal speeds or are they often on the edge of being out of
control?, is there a link with poor visibility?, etc. etc.

If anyone can't point out a link to this sort of info, it would be
greatly appreciated...

Don't know about accidents specifically involving trees, or at ski
resorts, but for avalanche incidents see

http://www.csac.org/Incidents

There are links there to accidents and books that describe the outcome.

Jon wrote:

Just heard that a friend of a friend was killed in Wyoming from a
collision with a tree. When something like that happens in climbing,
I always found it helpful to look at the accident report (a la
"Accidents in North American Mountaineering") to put the situation in
perspective and learn whatever there might be to learn from the
tragedy.

I'm sorry to hear about your friend.

I don't know if such a database exists, and I'm not sure how useful it
would be. Based on my own experience tree skiing (which I really enjoy)
the danger is mostly controllable by the skier. This is unlike the
objective dangers encountered in mountaineering. Heavily forrested
slopes are generally not in danger from avalanches or rockfall.

Hitting trees is generally a result of skiing too fast. If you have
basic skills (which any tree skier should have) you can avoid any
trees. You must be able to turn on a dime. If you can't you shouldn't
be there.

Of course, skiing really slowly through the trees isn't any fun. So
you ski faster. Then you try to ski as fast as you think you can.
That's fun. If you push a bit beyond your ability, you might hit
something. If you are unlucky, you might hit it in a bad way. These
are the risks that you take. slow=safe, fast=fun. It's the skiers choice.

Have fun, but be careful!

-Greg

There is no difference between subject and object.

Irradicate Dualism

Namu Dai Bosa

-klaus

It is an impression that I have that most tree accidents are the result of a
series of events that start on a groomed trail and end up in the trees at
the side of the trail. The skiers involved seem usually to be young and
good. Speed and skiing right at the edge of the trail to find better snow
quality are the primary factors, followed by horseplay on the trail,
followed by alchohol use.

Few reports that I have ever seen have involved off-piste accidents, the
Sonny Bono death being an exception.

I suspect that tree skiers who ski fast enough to really get hurt are
somewhat self selected to be experienced enough to balance the risks and
rewards.

No hard research on my part here; just my impressions from following the
sport for 40 years.

Tommy T.
"Jon" wrote in message
om...
Just heard that a friend of a friend was killed in Wyoming from a
collision with a tree. When something like that happens in climbing,
I always found it helpful to look at the accident report (a la
"Accidents in North American Mountaineering") to put the situation in
perspective and learn whatever there might be to learn from the
tragedy.

I'm wondering if such accident reports exists in the ski world? Each
year, there are a number of publicized deaths from tree
collisions--while each one is tragic, from a learning perspective, it
would be helpful to know, for example, are there typical conditions
when these happen (e.g., icy, poor cover), are victims usually skiing
at normal speeds or are they often on the edge of being out of
control?, is there a link with poor visibility?, etc. etc.

If anyone can't point out a link to this sort of info, it would be
greatly appreciated...

"Greg" wrote
Based on my own experience tree skiing (which I really enjoy)
the danger is mostly controllable by the skier. This is unlike the
objective dangers encountered in mountaineering. Heavily forrested
slopes are generally not in danger from avalanches or rockfall.

All the advice I've seen says that that it is a myth that avalanches don't
happen in forrests - especially ones that are open enough to ski fast:-

Hitting trees is generally a result of skiing too fast.

Of course, skiing really slowly through the trees isn't any fun. So
you ski faster.

Nick

Nick Thomas wrote:


All the advice I've seen says that that it is a myth that avalanches don't
happen in forrests - especially ones that are open enough to ski fast:-

They do happen in forests, just a lot less frequently. The presence of
many old trees is evidence that avalanches are infrequent. Certainly, it
could happen. But that's a lot different from certain other slopes
where they happen all the time. The main danger in tree skiing is
still hitting something becuase you are skiing too fast and/or
out of control.


-Greg

In article ,
Greg wrote:


Nick Thomas wrote:


All the advice I've seen says that that it is a myth that avalanches don't
happen in forrests - especially ones that are open enough to ski fast:-

They do happen in forests, just a lot less frequently. The presence of
many old trees is evidence that avalanches are infrequent. Certainly, it
could happen. But that's a lot different from certain other slopes
where they happen all the time. The main danger in tree skiing is
still hitting something becuase you are skiing too fast and/or
out of control.


- No it means they just don't get big enough to take out the
trees. An avalanche in the trees is especially dangerous since
there are lot's of hard things to hit. Even a small slab will
leave you falling uncontrollably, to turn in a avalanche you
have to be skiing faster than the snow is falling, next to
impossible in trees.

_ Tree slopes tend to be safer since they don't get as much wind
slab and they look steeper than they are usually. Check the
slope, steeper than 30 degrees and you need to think about
the avalanche potential trees or no trees. A small slab that
you generally survive in an open bowl can be fatal in the
trees where it can be focused by gullys. I believe this is
exactly how a ski patroller at Jackson Hole died a few years
ago.

_ There's another objective danger in the trees that I have only
seen in the Sierra. Falling snow clumps. The snow can be so heavy
and wet that it accumalates into large 20-30 lb lumps high in the
trees. On warm windy days following a storm these lumps fall out
en mass. 30 lbs from 60 feet can ruin your day.



_ Booker C. Bense

_ There's another objective danger in the trees that I have only
seen in the Sierra. Falling snow clumps. The snow can be so heavy
and wet that it accumalates into large 20-30 lb lumps high in the
trees. On warm windy days following a storm these lumps fall out
en mass. 30 lbs from 60 feet can ruin your day.


And what about those pine cones of the 100 foot trees....

--Chris

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article , Chris Webster wrote:

_ There's another objective danger in the trees that I have only
seen in the Sierra. Falling snow clumps. The snow can be so heavy
and wet that it accumalates into large 20-30 lb lumps high in the
trees. On warm windy days following a storm these lumps fall out
en mass. 30 lbs from 60 feet can ruin your day.


And what about those pine cones of the 100 foot trees....


_ Some do get quite big 30-40 cm. I think they only fall in
the summer though. I've never seen them on top of the snow.

_ I remember the first time I saw those lumps. It was a warm
windy day and I was on a relatively flat spot. I saw all these
lumps around me that were "obviously" sun balls, but I couldn't
figure out where they had rolled down from. It wasn't until one
dropped about 20 feet behind me that I finally looked up. Oh.....

_ Booker C. Bense


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQCO9CGTWTAjn5N/lAQGsqAQAtmQyU9kt1S3I8Gi2srcqkMq/0hnYHcCN
uOgxbSsPtWqGy+dcWWcSofpUGgobYF+AhB/5MaR7Rfbu/cVC2/Om9RnRkWzKahu5
ORsbV0A3cBuuBS0o3WiU+r06AcLm6jp2Az5mD9RQhehO0VxRz8 0YgkK9MRecTjnI
lxQ2JdnG46M=
=4Oys
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----