soloing in the backcountry

[skinnyskier]

It's all relative, right?

Skinning up Grizzly Gulch solo for a little post-Alta pre-beer workout=pretty safe.
Skiing Tanners solo just after a big snow and wind event=kinda risky.
The UAFC forecasters and observers go out solo from time to time, anyway.

You can balance conditions, exerience and route and come up with a reasonable decision for yourself. I usually don't do anything scarier than Grizzly solo under Utah winter conditions, but I wouldn't tell someone not to.

[Trackhead]

Funny, a four page thread on solo adventure. I'm going out solo again today, for the fifth day this year. Five days solo, one with Stoy. Toby Weed, the avy forecaster up here, was out solo yesterday. He was with us, then he bailed and went solo. We all soloed back to our cars at different times yesterday.

I would bet that groups of people in the BC risk their lives far more than a conservative soloist. Groups give a false sense of security. You can get caught in a slide and die of head or neck trauma just as easy in a group as solo. A group of knowledgeble, moderately testosterone riddled males is far more dangerous than a conservative, knowledgeable, moderately testosterone riddled soloist.

You want to see someone crazy, check out Dean Potter as he solos 5,000 foot Patagonia routes, solos Half Dome, etc. He's crazy. But you rarely see a four page thread about soloing in the climbing community.

[Spamhelmet]

Good posts here.

It is funny how different sports semms to dictate differently when one is
allowed to "go solo".

Backpacking,scuba,climbing,skiing..

One that goes climbing solo in kaukasus, are consired by his circle as an
dedicated,carefull,professional,groundbreaker.
Yet the risks he takes are greater or equal to the ones that go skiing
or diving.
Often the risk factor is decided and dictated by the circle of people with
lesser experience,aducative individuals and/or with the westernized safetyculture point of view.
When people gather enough experience along the way, they usually go
solo eventuall, if their viewing of personal safety allows it.
Usually the person then possesses the neccessary abilites to cope with the decision to go solo,have the necessary skills to handle the the accident/incident to the best of his abilities and has made it clear to her/himself what the consequenses might be in the worst case.

Also a intresting point seems to be the cultural difference between the new world/old one on the behalf of personal responcibilites.
Here on the old continent it seems that people are a bit more ready to
give the responsibilites of one´s actions to the one itself, instead of pampering.

As practicing most of the hobbies mentioned on this thread, and doing some of them solo regulary, it is indeed quite intresting subject.[academic voice]

On the behalf of this thread, nice pictures,nice TR and please continue posting more stuff, duder.

And keep it safe.

[Ireallyliketoski2]

You want to see someone crazy, check out Dean Potter as he solos 5,000 foot Patagonia routes, solos Half Dome, etc. He's crazy. But you rarely see a four page thread about soloing in the climbing community.

Good point, unless you're on rockclimbing.com, there's a to solo or not to solo 15 page thread every week there, which can be summed up by solo if you want to, if you don't that's fine too.

Other good point is the group mentality, I think the group does provide a false sense of security, I definitely take more risks when skiing in a group, mainly because when I ski solo I'm on terrain with low avalanche danger, I do more touring than skiing when solo, but in a group I'll ski some lines that I wouldn't ski if I were alone. I think beacons provide a sense of false security as well, oh let's smoke it, we have beacons, I've heard that sentiment from groups in the bc. This combined with the proliferation of backcountry skiing in general could lead to dire consequences.

[Villiage Idiot]

You can get caught in a slide and die of head or neck trauma just as easy in a group as solo.

I like people who always simplify everything to extremes. They always DIE in their arguments to end them. I know that if I do something like break my leg, I rather be solo than have any stupid friends in my group who might hurt themselves trying to help me!

A group of knowledgeble, moderately testosterone riddled males is far more dangerous than a conservative, knowledgeable, moderately testosterone riddled soloist.

What about comparing apples to apples? What about a group of conservative knowledgable moderatly testosterone males?

Good point, unless you're on rockclimbing.com, there's a to solo or not to solo 15 page thread every week there, which can be summed up by solo if you want to, if you don't that's fine too.

I heard they encourage people to go out like that Aaron Ralston guy doing dangerous shit with no preparations so you too can have the privelage of cutting off your own arm with a dull knife.

Other good point is the group mentality, I think the group does provide a false sense of security, I definitely take more risks when skiing in a group, mainly because when I ski solo I'm on terrain with low avalanche danger, I do more touring than skiing when solo, but in a group I'll ski some lines that I wouldn't ski if I were alone. I think beacons provide a sense of false security as well, oh let's smoke it, we have beacons, I've heard that sentiment from groups in the bc. This combined with the proliferation of backcountry skiing in general could lead to dire consequences.

Clearly its safer to not have any backup because other groups have stupid people in them. The logic is brilliant! Always assume when you choose a group of your friends that your friends are DUMBASSES. Clearly solo is the way to go!

Beacons definately encourage risky activity! I think I'd drive faster if I had a modern car with such speed encouraging features as antilock brakes, crumple zones, airbags and seatbelts. That is why I drive this:



It's much safer highway!

[Ireallyliketoski2]

I like people who always simplify everything to extremes. They always DIE in their arguments to end them. I know that if I do something like break my leg, I rather be solo than have any stupid friends in my group who might hurt themselves trying to help me!



What about comparing apples to apples? What about a group of conservative knowledgable moderatly testosterone males?


I heard they encourage people to go out like that Aaron Ralston guy doing dangerous shit with no preparations so you too can have the privelage of cutting off your own arm with a dull knife.



Clearly its safer to not have any backup because other groups have stupid people in them. The logic is brilliant! Always assume when you choose a group of your friends that your friends are DUMBASSES. Clearly solo is the way to go!

Beacons definately encourage risky activity! I think I'd drive faster if I had a modern car with such speed encouraging features as antilock brakes, crumple zones, airbags and seatbelts. That is why I drive this:



It's much safer highway!

She's a sweet ride.
Is that your orthodpedic pillow on the passenger seat?

[Angry Whelk]

Village Idiot is die. drown from above due to sounding like summit 90210.

shinjuku, MOTHERFUCKER!

[greendot]

APD: Don't listen to anything Blurred11's has to say. He's a cowardly republican pussy. Do whatever the fuck you want to do.